HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 6894 of 2026 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. 2. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition challenging an order dated 12.04.2026 passed by respondent no. 2, whereby the petitioner has been deputed for Census 2027 training and duty without considering his representation and personal hardship. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after completing his training for the purpose of election duty, he moved a representation before respondent no. 2 to exempt him from the census duty, as he has to take care of his wife, but nothing has been done till date, therefore, a direction may be issued upon respondent no. 2 to consider and decide his representation expeditiously. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is contrary to the provisions contained under Section 27 of Right of Children of Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which mandates that no teacher shall be appointed for any non-educational purposes as well as against the guidelines. The issue has already been settled in the case of Surya Pratap Singh vs. State of U.P. and Others, passed in Writ-A No.16401 of 2024, decided on 11.02.2025, therefore, the impugned order may be quashed. 5. Learned Standing counsel submits earlier with regard to appointment of Booth Level Officers, that Election Commission of India has issued a circular dated 05.06.2025 modifying its previous guidelines, which are as follows: Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Raj Kumar Prajapati Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Nafees Ahmad Ansari .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) "1.1 ERO to appoint a BLO for each part of an electoral roll, under Section 13B(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, amongst any Group C and above regular serving employees of state/local government enrolled as elector in that part. 1.2 In the absence of regular state/local government employees, ERO may appoint BLO amongst Anganwadi workers, Contract Teachers, or central government employees. However, in such cases, CEO shall obtain a non-availability certificate singed by ERO and countersigned by DEO. 1.3 In the absence of any employee of categories mentioned above enrolled as an elector in that part of electoral roll, ERO with the prior approval of CEO, may appoint BLO amongst such categories of employee working in the area covered by that part of electoral roll. 1.4 In any other case, prior approval from the Commission shall be mandatory." 6. In the aforesaid circular, all the Chief Electoral Officers have been requested for strict compliance of the above said guidelines as the deputation of Booth Level Officers is a policy matter, which now has to be seen in accordance with the circular dated 05.06.2025. 7. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the present case is a policy matter and that no statutory provision has been violated, therefore, the submission and reliance placed by learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable here. He relies on the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. R.K. Goyal Vs. State of U.P. and Ors., (1996) 11 SCC 658, in which the Court has recognized the executive's discretion in policy matters. 8. In view of the above, no interference is called for. 9. However, it is provided that in case the petitioner moves a representation, ventilating his grievances, before the authorities concerned, the same shall be consider and decided, in accordance with the new modified guidelines, as expeditiously as possible. 10. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the present writ petition is disposed of. May 7, 2026 DS WRIA No. 6894 of 2026 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad