WPSS/2353/2018
2022 Latest Caselaw 659 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPSS   No.   2353   of   2018
                                  WPSS   No.   2859   of   2018
                                  WPSS   No.   2873   of   2018
                                  WPSS   No.   2877   of   2018
                                  Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Harendra Belwal, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand.

Petitioners were appointed in different Government Aided Junior High Schools before State reorganisation. Upon State reorganisation, the institutions in which petitioners served, were provincialized. Since benefit of post services rendered by them in Government Aided Institutions is not being granted, therefore, they have approached this Court seeking following relief:-

(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent department to give the benefits of the services rendered by the petitioner in Government Aided School/Parishadiya Vidyalaya in pursuance of the order dated 28.06.2010 State of Uttarakhand and others. Vs. Veer Singh Bhandari and others.

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to grant all consequential benefits from the date of initial appointment i.e. 07.09.1998.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment rendered by coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSS No. 527 of 2018 (Kailash Chandra Pathak & others vs State of Uttarakhand & others) with connected petitions. Based on the said judgment, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are entitled to benefit of ACP by adding services rendered by them before provincialisation of their institutions.

This submission, however, has been disputed by learned Additional C.S.C. for the State who submits that judgment relied upon by the petitioners is distinguishable on fact.

Since petitioners sought a writ of mandamus and they are yet make a demand to the Competent Authority, therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach Director, School Education by making separate representations. If petitioners make such representations with two weeks from today, Director, School Education shall look into the prayer made by the petitioners and take appropriate decision, as per applicable Rules, as early as possible but not later than four months from the date of production of this order along with representations.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 09.03.2022 Aswal