1. For engagement of Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre, Reshipora Nuner Ganderbal, petitioner and respondent No. 5 have also applied. Respondent No. 5 has been selected. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner is superior in merit as she has obtained 267 marks out of 500 in matriculation whereas respondent No. 5 has obtained 266 marks out of 500. 3. The reply as filed by respondents No. 1 to 4 is suggestive of the fact that as per criteria fixed for selection, 85 marks have been allocated for academic qualification and 15 marks for viva voce. In viva voce petitioner has been awarded 10.5 out of 15 marks whereas respondent No. 5 has been awarded 11.5 out of 15 marks. Then merit of the petitioner has been correctly worked out as 55.89 points whereas respondent No. 5 has secured 56.72 points, so the respondent No. 5, being superior in merit, has been selected. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner exceedingly faired well in the interview, therefore, she should have been selected. 5. In the process of interview, it is only when petitioner has faired well, she has been awarded 10.5 out of 15 marks but in the estimation of the Committee respondent No. 5 has faired better, that is why she has been awarded 11.5 marks. The Court cannot substitute its opinion as against the opinion of the interview committee unless any mala fide is attributable and discernible from the records. Nothing in this direction is noticeable from the records. 6. Since in the process of selection respondent No. 5 has been found superior in merit having secured 56.72 points as against the petitioner who has secured only 55.89 points, therefore, selection of respondent No. 5 is not interferable, same is maintained. Writ petition being misconceived and without merit is dismissed.