2025:UHC:10052 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS/ 1 7 9 1 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J 1. Ms. Geetanjali Dhami, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. N.K. Papnoi, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner has challenged selection and appointment of respondent no. 5 as Aanganbadi Karyakatri. Petitioner contends that her score of marks in the selection was more than respondent no. 5, therefore, there was no reason or justification for appointing respondent no. 5 by ignoring her claim. 4. Learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions. Today, on instructions, Mr. N.K. Papnoi, submits that both, petitioner and respondent no. 5, had claimed that they are divorcee, therefore, entitled to preferential treatment, as per Government Policy. He submits that petitioner had not enclosed divorce decree along with her application while respondent no. 5 had enclosed the divorce decree. 5. Learned State Counsel refers to Clause 12(5) of Government Order dated 18.12.2024, which provides that anyone claiming benefit, as divorcee, has to enclose copy of divorce decree. Learned State Counsel, thus submits that since application filed by respondent no. 5 was accompanied with a divorce decree, therefore, she was given preferential treatment and as such she was selected 2025:UHC:10052 and appointed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that application submitted by respondent no. 5 was not supported by relevant documents and fifteen days time was given to her for making-up the deficiency. 6. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that time given was for some other insignificant documents and the fact remains that application filed by respondent no. 5 was supported by divorce decree. 7. Be that as it may since petitioner submits that she is identically placed as respondent no. 5 and she has scored more marks, therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the Competent Authority by making representation. If petitioner makes representation within one week from today, the Competent Authority shall take decision thereupon, within three weeks thereafter. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J) 13.11.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b0 8d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F 4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.11.13 05:14:26 -08'00' 2025:UHC:10052