Committee of Management vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

B.S. Verma, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Learned Counsel for the parties have agreed to dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage itself as pleadings of both the parties have already been exchanged.

By means of this writ petition, the Petitioner has sought following reliefs:

I. Issue a writ , order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Govt. Order dated 19.04.2010 and 20.04.2010 passed by Respondent No. 1 (contained as annexure No. 7 to this writ petition) and to quash the order dated 21.04.2010 passed by Respondent No. 3 (contained as annexure No. 8 to this writ petition).

II. to pass a suitable writ, order or direction in favour of Petitioner and against the Respondents which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

III. To award the cost of the present writ petition to the Petitioner.

During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that he does not want to press the relief for quashing order dated 20.04.2010 (page 24 on record). Therefore, relief for quashing order dated 20.04.2010, is dismissed as not pressed.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that similar controversy has been decided by this Court vide order dated 14.09.2010 in Writ Petition No. 604 of 2010 (M/S), Committee of Management v. State of Uttarakhand and Ors.

Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State has fairly conceded that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is similar to that of Writ Petition No. 604 of 2010 (M/S), Committee of Management v. State of Uttarakhand and Ors.

In the present writ petition, the selection process of Lecturers and L.T. grade Teachers in aided institution has been stayed whereas in Writ Petition No. 604 of 2010 (M/S), Committee of Management v. State of Uttarakhand and Ors. the selection process on the post of Principal was stayed. Order dated 19.04.2010 is a common order in both the petitions.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is decided in terms of order dated 14.09.2010, passed in writ petition No. 604 of 2010 (M/S). Orders dated 19.04.2010 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition), and order dated 21.04.2010 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition), are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, orders dated 19.04.2010 and 21.04.2010 are set aside. The writ petition is allowed. It is directed that selection process be initiated further and approval be given in accordance with the Rules.