HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13036 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Ms.Deep Shikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel for opposite party Nos. 1 to 5. 2. In view of the order being passed, issuance of opposite party No.6 stands dispensed with. 3. Petition has been filed challenging selection of Smt. Shailesh Singh, W/o Sunil Kumar Singh as Anganwadi Worker for the center concerned. Further prayer for consideration of petitioner's name for selection on the said post has also been made. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that in the application submitted by opposite party No.6, she has incorporated the name of her husband as Magan Bahadur Singh in place of Sunil Kumar Singh and since she has been selected in view of her correction having been made in the application form it is impermissible in terms of the Government Order dated 21.03.2023. 5. Learned State Counsel has been provided written instructions dated 06.11.2025 a copy of which is taken on record and on the basis of which, it is submitted that opposite party No.6, in fact, had submitted two application forms, one with the wrong name of her husband and the other with the correct name. It is submitted that it is on the basis of the correct application form that she was selected Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Haushila Prasad Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Preeti Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Bal Vikas Sewa Evam Pushtahar Lko. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) under Unreserved Category and therefore, there was no question of any correction in the application form submitted by the opposite party No.6. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, particularly the written instructions, it is therefore evident that opposite party No.6 had submitted two application forms with the correct one taken cognizance and being the basis of her selection. It is not the case of opposite party No.6 that the selection was under Below Poverty Line (BPL) category which would have a bearing on the incorrect name of the husband of opposite party No.6. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and discussions made above, this Court does not find a good ground to grant indulgence. 8. Petition therefore fails and is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own costs. November 11, 2025 lakshman WRIA No. 13036 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAKSHMANA KUMAR TAMMANA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench