JUDGMENT : Madhuresh Prasad, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent State. 2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that her selection as Anganbari Sevika for Centre no. 35, Gram Hardeayan has wrongly been cancelled by alleging that her gotni was Savika in the centre in question. 3. The respondents have placed on record the 2006 guidelines under which the selection was made. The decision to cancel the petitioner's selection has been done in light of Clause 3(p) of 2006 guidelines which reads as follows:- ?k- lsfodk ,oa lgkf;dk vkil esa fdlh izdkj ls laca/kh@fj'rsnkj ugha gksxs] ;Fkk lkl&cgq] uun&HkkHkh] cgu ,oa Hkrhth vkfnA 4. No rejoinder has been filed disputing the contentions/reasons for cancellation of the petitioner's selection since she was relative of a Sahayika of the same centre. 5. The reason assigned by the authorities for removing the petitioner's selection is supported by 2006 guidelines. In absence of any denial to the same, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. 6. The writ petition is dismissed.