WPSS/1139/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 1878 UK

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             and Registrar's
                order with
               Signatures
                               WPSS No. 1139 of 2022
                               Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Deepak Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. V.S. Rawat, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. According to the petitioner, he was engaged as Shiksha Prerakh/Acharya under Education Guarantee Scheme of the State Government, in 2006. It is further the case of the petitioner that he served in the said capacity till 31.03.2012 in E.G.S. Center Papdi, Post Peerumadara, District Nainital. Petitioner has not rendered service after 01.04.2012.

In this writ petition, petitioner has sought a direction to District Education Officer, Elementary, Nainital to take decision on his representation dated 15.03.2021. The said representation is on record as Annexure No. 11 to the writ petition, in which petitioner has claimed absorption as Shiksha Mitra.

Learned Deputy Advocate General has relied upon a judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 3 of 2015 and other connected cases. Based on the said judgment, learned Deputy Advocate General submits that claim of the petitioner for absorption as Shiksha Mitra, is legally unsustainable.

This Court is also of the considered opinion that since petitioner has not rendered service as Shiksha Prerakh/Acharya after 31.03.2022, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this belated stage.

This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned Deputy Advocate General that the Policy, under which Shiksha Acharyas were to be absorbed as Shiksha Mitra, has been discontinued long back and every appointment/engagement as a Primary School Teacher, is to be made as per Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

In such view of the matter, the writ petition fails and is dismissed.

There will be no order as to costs.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 28.06.2022 Arpan