HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 8335 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ashwani Kumar Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and learned state counsel for opposite parties. 2. Earlier on 13th November 2025 following order had been passed:- "1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for the opposite parties. 1A. Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. It has been submitted that by means of impugned order dated 06.05.2025 and 03.07.2025, petitioner's candidature for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker has been rejected solely on the ground that the Caste Certificate submitted by petitioner did not match the details available on E-portal. 3. He has adverted to order dated 04.04.2025 passed by this Court in the earlier Writ A No.3579 of 2025. It is submitted that this Court while noticing the fact that petitioner had made a typographical mistake while entering the certificate number, indicated the same as a human error and therefore direction was issued to the concerned authority to verify the certificate number of petitioner's Caste Certificate. 4. It is submitted that since petitioner admittedly was placed at serial no.1 in the select list, only verification of certificate number was required to be done but the impugned order has been passed reiterating the aforesaid fact without verification of the Caste Certificate number correctly indicated by petitioner. 5. From a perusal of the counter affidavit filed today, it is evident that the opposite parties have reiterated rejection of petitioner's candidature on the same ground that the Caste Certificate number indicated in her application did not match details Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashwani Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sangeeta Vishwakarma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Bal Vikas Sewa Ewam Pushtahar Vibhag Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) available on E-portal. 6. Evidently, directions issued by this Court on 04.04.2025 have not been followed and the opposite parties do not appear to have verified the Caste Certificate number as provided by petitioner indicating it to be corrected; a fact which was noticed in the order dated 04.04.2025. 7. In view thereof, list this case on 10.12.2025, as fresh in order to enable concerned authority to verify the details of Caste Certificate No.241820030028331 which is purportedly the correct Caste Certificate number of petitioner, a copy of which has also been brought on record as a party of Annexure No.6 at page 32 to the writ petition. The concerned authority shall file an affidavit by next date of listing regarding verification of the aforesaid Caste Certificate. " 3. In pursuance thereof, learned state counsel has been provided written instructions dated 9th December, 2025, which are taken on record and as per which after due verification of caste certificate of petitioner, the same was found to be verified and correct. 4. It is evident from record that earlier petitioner had filed A No. 3579 of 2025 challenging order dated 13th February 2025 whereby direction had been issued disallowing application of petitioner pertaining to her candidature for recruitment on the post of Anganwadi worker. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 4th April 2025 indicating the aspect that it would be too harsh to cancel her candidature based solely on a typographical error, which could be rectified particularly if petitioner is not gaining any undue benefit from correction in the application form. Directions were issued for consideration of her candidature and for correction of online date in case petitioner is finally selected. 5. It also appears that compliance in letter and spirit of the aforesaid directions was not made by the opposite parties whereby impugned orders have been passed. It is also evident that subsequently the opposite parties have realized their mistake and corrected the same as have been brought on record by means of written instructions dated 9th December 2025. The instructions as well as the impugned order itself clearly indicates the aspect that petitioner stood first in the select list for the aforesaid recruitment but appointment letter was not issued owing to the aforesaid discrepancy which now stands rectified. WRIA No. 8335 of 2025 2 6. It is also evident from the written instructions that in the meantime another person namely one Km. Rubiya daughter of Mohd. Sagir has been appointed on the aforesaid post. Although the said person is not a party to the present litigation and has not been heard but in view of the directions issued by this Court earlier and in view of the fact that a typographical mistake of petitioner has been directed to be corrected by this Court and in compliance thereof, correction has already been made coupled with the fact that petitioner admittedly stood first in the select list, the grant of time for hearing the said person, namely, Km. Rubiya would amount to an empty formality. In such circumstances, hearing to the said person is being dispensed with. 7. In view of the aforesaid assertion by opposite parties, the impugned orders dated 6th May 2025 and 3rd July 2025 are hereby quashed by issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari with a further direction to opposite parties to ensure continuance of petitioner on the post of Aanganwadi worker in view of the fact that admittedly petitioner stood first in the select list for recruitment on the post of Aanganwadi worker in the center concerned. Opposite parties are directed to issue an appointment letter to the petitioner in pursuance of selection and to continue her as per terms of the contract. She will also be entitled for regular salary/honorarium as and when due. 8. Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Parties to bear their own costs. December 10, 2025 prabhat WRIA No. 8335 of 2025 3 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench