Rajpal v. Dheer Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 3405 OF 2023 19TH DECEMBER, 2023 Committee of Management

…..Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand & others

….Respondents. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 2839 OF 2023 Committee of Management

…..Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand & others

….Respondents. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 3412 OF 2023 Committee of Management National Kanya Inter College

…..Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand & others

….Respondents. WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 3416 OF 2023 Committee of Management Arya Inter College & another

…..Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand & others

….Respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parikshit Saini and Mr. Alok

Mahra, learned counsel. Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. S.N. Babulkar, learned

Advocate General assisted by Mr.

Jagdish Singh Bisht, learned

Standing Counsel.

The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Rakesh Thapliyal)

By order dated 08.12.2023, the State Counsel was directed to get instructions in the matter as to on what basis and reasons, again and again, the Institutions are not being permitted to fill-up the vacant posts. Thereafter, on

13.12.2023, the Secretary, School Education, was directed to remain present in the Court on 14.12.2023, through video conferencing. On

14.12.2023, Major Yogendra Yadav, Additional Secretary, and Mr. Pankaj Kumar Pandey, the In-charge Secreatary, appeared through video conferencing, and both assisted the Court, but this Court was not convinced with the submissions made by Major Yogendra Yadav, Additional Secretary, and that was the reason that on

14.12.2023, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Pandey, In-charge Secretary was requested to assist the Court on the next date fixed.

2.

Today, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Pandey, In-charge Secretary appears through video conferencing, and assists this Court. He submits that, now necessary directions have been issued to the Director General, School Education, and the Director General, School Education, in turn, issued the necessary instructions to the concerned Chief Education Officer of all the districts to proceed with the recruitment process.

3.

Since the In-charge Secretary has given the statement before this Court that now necessary directions have been issued to the Director General, School Education, who, in turn, issued the necessary instructions to all the concerned Chief Education Officer of all the districts, in such view of the matter, the order passed by the Chief Education Officer dated 29.11.2023, has no meaning.

4.

Mr. Babulkar, learned Advocate General submits that now, since the In-charge Secretary has given the statement that necessary directions have been issued to the Director General, School Education, who also issued the necessary instructions to all the concerned Chief Education Officer of all the districts to proceed with the recruitment process, therefore, there is no useful purpose to continue the order dated 29.11.2023, passed by the Chief Education Officer.

5.

In view of this, Writ Petition Nos. (M/S) 3405 of 2023, (M/S) 3412 of 2023 and (M/S) 3416 of 2023 are disposed of, and the order passed by the Chief Education Officer, dated 29.11.2023, is quashed in view of the statement, as given by the In-charge Secretary.

6.

It is made clear that the recruitment process, if any, as directed to be initiated on the basis of the statement,

as given by the In-charge Secretary, shall be subject to the final outcome of Writ Petition (M/S) No.2839 of 2023.

Writ Petition (M/S) No.2839 of 2023

7.

The respondents may file the counter-affidavit within six weeks.

8.

Two weeks' time, thereafter, is granted to learned counsel for the petitioner to file the rejoinder-affidavit.

9.

List this case after eight weeks.

¶10Interim order dated 10.10.2023 is extended till the next date of listing.

(RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.) Dated: 19th December, 2023 NISHANT