2025:UHC:10261 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 PMS/ 3 1 2 7 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J 1. Mr. Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner participated in a selection for appointment as Aanganwari Karyakatri, however, her name is figured at Sl. No. 6 in order of merit against one vacancy available in Aanganwari Centre No. 3 Purushottam Nagar, Revenue Village Bhagtanpur Abidpur. 4. Petitioner contended that although she possesses M.A. Degree, which was also indicated in the application form, however, she was not given any weightage for the marks scored in M.A. Examination, due to which her name figured at Sl. No. 6 in the merit list and if weightage of M.A. Examination was given to her, then she would be on the top of the merit list. 5. Learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions in the matter. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned State Counsel, on instructions, submits that petitioner had uploaded only mark-sheet of 3rd Semester of M.A. Course and she failed to upload the mark-sheet for 1st, 2nd & 4th Semesters, therefore, she was not given any weightage for passing M.A. Examination. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has drawn attention of this Court to the online application submitted by petitioner, which is on record as annexure 3 to the writ petition. Perusal of the said 2025:UHC:10261 application reveals that petitioner has mentioned that she passed M.A. from Gurukul Kangri University, Haridwar in 2019 with 68.06 percent marks; therefore, this Court finds some substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that if the Authorities had any doubt regarding the marks scored by petitioner in M.A. Examination, then they could have asked the petitioner to submit the mark-sheets for M.A. Examination. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner had uploaded mark-sheet for 4th Semester M.A. Examination and the stand taken by respondents that she had uploaded only 3rd Semester mark-sheet is not correct. 9. Without going into the rival contentions raised by the parties, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met, if petitioner is permitted to make representation to the Competent Authority. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation to Director, Directorate of Women Empowerment & Child Development (respondent no. 2), within one week from today. If she makes representation within stipulated time, respondent no. 2 shall take decision thereupon, as per law, within ten weeks thereafter. It goes without saying that all the stakeholders, including respondent no. 7, shall be given opportunity of hearing before passing any order. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J) 19.11.2025 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=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005 aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE 3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0 , cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.11.19 03:55:50 -08'00' 2025:UHC:10261