WP(C) No. 1119/2026 Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Case No: WP(C) No. 1119/2026 CM No.2927/2026 Uploaded on:20 .05.2026 Ishrat Gulzar …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Wani Manzoor, Advocate. Vs. UT of J&K and others …. Respondent(s) Through: Mr.Waseem Gull, GA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 19.05.2026 1. Through the medium of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction upon respondent No. 4 to select and appoint her as Anganwadi Helper for Anganwadi Centre, Ward No. 06, Dar Mohalla Daril, Tarathpora-B, District Kupwara. A further direction is sought for conducting verification with regard to the qualification certificates of respondent No. 5 and for restraining the official respondents from appointing respondent No. 5 as Anganwadi Helper. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record of the case. WP(C) No. 1119/2026 Page 2 of 3 3. According to the petitioner, pursuant to the advertisement notification issued for engagement of Sahiyikas (Anganwadi Helpers), she participated in the selection process as she fulfilled all the prescribed eligibility conditions. It has been contended that respondent No. 5 is not a resident of the concerned ward/hamlet and, therefore, was not eligible to participate in the selection process. It has further been submitted that the petitioner had secured the first position in the merit list and that the CDPO, Ramhall, Kupwara, had verbally informed her that the additional two points awarded to her would be withdrawn. The petitioner has further alleged that the concerned CDPO is hand in glove with respondent No. 5 and is intending to select her at any cost. It has also been contended that respondent No. 5 possesses higher qualification than the prescribed qualification and, therefore, is ineligible for engagement as Anganwadi Helper. 4. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has placed on record a copy of the tentative select list, which shows that her name figures therein. It is not the case of the petitioner that the official respondents have concluded the selection process or that the name of respondent No. 5 has been substituted in place of the petitioner in the tentative select list. Merely on the basis of an apprehension that the official respondents are going to select respondent No. 5 by replacing the petitioner, the present writ petition cannot be maintained, particularly when, as per the petitioner’s own case, the selection process has not been concluded by the official respondents as yet. 5. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has approached this Court prematurely. Accordingly, the WP(C) No. 1119/2026 Page 3 of 3 writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to take resort to appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law, in case she has any grievance after the selection process is completed by the official respondents. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge Jammu 19.05.2026 Madan Verma-Secy Whether order is speaking? Yes Whether order is reportable? No MADAN LAL VERMA 2026.05.20 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document