2026:UHC:3983 SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, r ep or t s, or d er s or p r oceed in g s or d ir ect ion s an d Reg ist r ar ’s or d er w it h Sig n at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS 1 2 7 0 / 2 0 2 6 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Ms. Sheetal Selwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, Additional CSC, for the State. (2) Petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Sahayika. Her appointment was however cancelled by Child Development Project Officer, Bazpur, Udham Singh Nagar, vide order dated 22.12.2025. Petitioner has challenged the said order in this writ petition. (3) Perusal of the impugned order reveals that petitioner’s appointment was cancelled on the ground that she contested election for the O/ o Member of Gram Sabha, in which she was declared elected and as per the Government Order dated 18.12.2024, Anganwadi Karyakarti/ Anganwadi Sahayika cannot hold the O/ o Gram Pradhan, Up Pradhan, Member of Gram Sabha, etc. and if they file nomination for contesting elections for the aforesaid offices, then they will have to tender resignation before filing nomination. (4) Learned State Counsel has produced in Court the Government Order dated 18.12.2024. Clause 21 of the said Government Order, in fact, prohibits Anganwadi Karyakarti and Anganwadi Sahayika from contesting elections and it ordains that any Anganwadi Karyakarti/ Sahayika, if contests election, then she will have to tender resignation before filing nomination. 2026:UHC:3983 (5) Since the service conditions of Anganwadi Sahayika are governed by the aforesaid Government Order, therefore, the order impugned in this writ petition cannot be faulted. The contention raised by the petitioner that she was not aware about the prohibition contained in the Government Order against contesting election cannot be accepted. Ignorance of law is no excuse is a well settled legal principle. Thus there is no scope for interference in the m atter. (6) Learned Counsel for the petitioner then subm its that the post of Member/ Gram Pradhan is not Office of Profit, therefore the prohibition contained in Clause 21 of the Government Order would not be attracted in her case. (7) Without expressing any opinion on the aforesaid contention, this Court perm its the petitioner to make a representation. If she makes representation within ten days from today, decision thereupon shall be taken by the competent authority, as per law, within eight weeks thereafter. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 2 1 .5 .2 0 2 6 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61 af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB58 8052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.05.21 17:46:26 +05'30' 2026:UHC:3983