2026:UHC:2103 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/769/2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner participated in a selection for appointment as Anganwari Karyakatri. However, she was not selected, and instead, respondent no. 5 was selected and appointed. 4. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, rule, order or direction in nature of certiorari quashing the selection/appointment order of private respondent no. 5 to the post of Aganbari Karyakarti in Aganbari Centre No. 4 at Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar; calling for record from the respondents. (ii) Issue a writ, rule, order or direction in nature of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner to the post of Aganbari Karyakarti in Aganbari Centre No.4 at Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar. 5. Mr. Gyanendrapal Singh, Bal Vikas Pariyogana Adhikari, Bhagwanpur has filed counter affidavit on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 4. Para 7 and 9 of the counter affidavit are reproduced below:- “7. That the contents of para no. 10 & 11 of the writ petition are not admitted as stated, hence denied. In reply thereto it is submitted that clause 3.1 (kha) of Government Order no. 2026:UHC:2103 309/XVII(4)/2023-31(2)/2005 TC(22/22078) dated 20.02.2023 provides that “in case of non- availability of suitable candidates of specific category against any post, the candidate obtaining maximum marks will be selected on the basis of their merit among other candidates. If two or more candidates have equal marks with respect to any centre, then the candidate with higher educational qualification will be selected. If two or more candidates having equal marks with respect to any centre, then the candidate obtaining higher percentage will be selected by calculating the percentage of marks obtained by them in different education qualifications. If on the basis of the above process also, two candidates are having equal percentage of marks, then the candidate, who is higher in age will be selected.” Though the petitioner i.e. Smt. Kusum and the selected candidate Smt. Karishma have secured equal merit marks, but Smt. Karishma is having secured percentage 103.85, which is higher than the total percentage secured by the petitioner Smt. Kusum i.e. 100.95, therefore, taking into consideration the higher percentage of total marks, Smt. Karishma is selected for promotion on the post of Anganbadi Worker. For kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court true/correct typed version/copy of Government Order dated 20.02.2023 and marks-sheets of petitioner and marks-sheets of Smt. Karishma are being filed herewith and marked as Annexure CA-1, 2 (colly.) & 3 (colly.) to this affidavit. 9. That the contents of para no. 13 to 21 of the writ petition are not admitted, hence denied. As already stated above, taking into consideration clause 3.1(kha) of Government Order no. 309/XVII(4)/2023-31(2)/2005 TC(22/22078) dated 20.02.2023, the respondent no. 5 is selected for promotion on the post of Aganbadi Worker having higher percentage of total karks i.e. 103.85, which isw in accordance with the requirement of Government Order dated 20.02.2023.” 6. Learned State Counsel submits that petitioner as well as respondent no. 5 secured equal quality points marks. Since percentage of marks scored by respondent no. 5, in different examination, was more, therefore, as per the stipulation made in Government Order dated 20.02.2023, respondent no. 2026:UHC:2103 5 was selected and appointed. Thus, it is contended on behalf of respondents that the selection process was held strictly as per the applicable Government Policy and thus, there is no irregularity whatsoever was committed at any stage. 7. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel. Since the Government Order lays down the procedure for selection for the post of Anganwari Karyakartri has been held strictly as per Government Order, therefore, there is no scope of interference in the matter. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J) 24.03.2026 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=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08 b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DAC F4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2026.03.30 21:17:54 -07'00'