PRIYANKA KUMARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. BAL VIKAS EVAM PUSHTAHAR LKO. AND 5 OTHERS
WRIA/6980/2025 · 2025-07-02
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148582 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148582 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37205 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6980 of 2025 Petitioner :- Priyanka Kumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Bal Vikas Evam Pushtahar Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Pandey,Sanjay Kumar Bajpai,Trivendra Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for the opposite parties.
2. In view of order being proposed to be passed, notice to opposite party no. 6 stand dispensed with.
3. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite parties to conduct a fair and impartial recruitment process for the post of Anganbadi Karyakatri and for appointment of petitioner on that post in Village Devokali Buzurg, Post Gagha, District Gorakhpur.
4. Learned State Counsel on the basis of instructions however, submits that present petition is misconceived in view of the fact that recruitment process for the said post in the said village has already been completed with respondent no. 6 having been selected and joined in pursuance thereof but the said selection process has not been challenged.
5. From perusal of material available on record, it is quite evident that selection process for said post in the concerned village has already been concluded is a fact, which has been concealed in the writ petition.
6. In view thereof, petition being misconceived is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Order Date :- 2.7.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench