Uttarakhand High Court
Suman vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 2 July, 2025
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 1103 of 2025 (S/S)
Suman ..........Petitioner
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and others ........ Respondents
Present : Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Chandra
Shekhar Dalakoti, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Narain Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos.1 to
3.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
By means of the instant petition, the petitioner
seeks the following reliefs:-
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
Certiorari, quashing the impugned order of
cancellation of appointment of the petitioner
dated 16.06.2025 issued by the District
Education Officer, Chamoli, contained in
Annexure-1 to this petition.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus declaring the impugned order of
cancellation of appointment of the petitioner
dated 11.06.2025, as arbitrary and illegal and
violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution
of India.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus directing and commanding the
respondents to pay all consequential benefits to
the petitioner w.e.f. from the date of cancellation
of appointment to the petitioner.
(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case.
(v) Award cost of petition to the petitioner.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. At the very outset, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the petitioner submits that the matter is
squarely covered by the judgment dated 01.07.2025,
passed by this Court in WPSS No.1092 of 2025, Jagdeesh
Lal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others.
4. Learned State Counsel admits this fact.
5. Since the matter is covered, instant petition is
decided in terms of the judgment dated 01.07.2025,
passed by this Court in WPSS No.1092 of 2025, Jagdeesh
Lal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others. Accordingly, the
impugned order dated 16.06.2025 is set aside.
6. The respondents shall give a Show Cause
Notice to the petitioner within a week. Within two weeks,
thereafter, the petitioner shall submit his response to the
Show Cause Notice raising all the defenses available to
her and, thereafter, in the next two weeks, the matter
may be decided.
7. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that the respondents may be directed
to permit the petitioner to resume her duties because in
the earlier petitions, similar orders were passed by this
Court, but the respondent-authorities, despite the
impugned orders on those orders having been set aside,
are not permitting the petitioners, in those cases, to
resume their duties.
8. Since the impugned order, by which the
appointment/candidature of the petitioner has been
rejected, has already been set aside, its natural
consequence is that the petitioner shall be permitted to
resume her duties.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
02.07.2025
Ravi Bisht
