Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39936 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7541 of 2025 Petitioner :- Priyanka Madesiya Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Child Development Service And Nutrition Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajey Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties 1 and 2. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party No.3 stands dispensed with. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 26th June, 2025 whereby petitioner's complaint/representation against selection of opposite party No.3 Smt. Meera Devi, wife of Sant Kumar has been rejected. 3. It has been submitted that petitioner had earlier been issued a certificate dated 31st January, 2022 indicating the petitioner to be in the below poverty line category and it was specifically indicated that the certificate would be valid for the period of 3 years from the date of its issuance but has been ignored only on account of the fact that it was not issued within a period of six months from the date of advertisement for recruitment. It is submitted that it was due to the aforesaid fact, that petitioner has been treated to be in the above poverty line category and therefore the opposite party No.3 has been selected treating her to be in below poverty line category and therefore granted preference. It is therefore submitted that once petitioner's certificate clearly indicated that would be valid for a period of three years, the petitioner should have been considered in the BPL category whereunder she would have gained more merit marks than the opposite party No.3. 4. Mr. V.K. Bajpayee learned State Counsel has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with submission that the advertisement specifically prescribed a condition that the income certificate should have been issued within a period of six months form the date of advertisement and therefore the opposite parties have rightly rejected the petitioner's candidature in the BPL category. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident and admitted that petitioner submitted the certificate dated 31st January, 2022 to indicate her status in the BPL category. It is also admitted that the advertisement specifically indicated a condition that the income certificate submitted by an applicant was required to be issued within a period of six months from the date of advertisement. 6. In view of aforesaid, since admittedly petitioner's certificate did not adhere to the conditions of advertisement, she has been rightly treated to be under APL category. Considering aforesaid facts, this court does not consider it to be a fit case to grant indulgence. The petition therefore fails and is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own cost. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 prabhat Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench