AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.S. Verma, J.—Heard learned Counsel of the parties and perused the record.
By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs:
1 Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner from the date Junior to the petitioners have been promoted by respondent No. 3.
2 Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment.
3 Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to assign the seniority from the date of initial appointment.
4 Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
5 Allow the writ petition with cost.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners has stated that the prayer No. 1 has rendered infructuous, since, the petitioners had been promoted vide order dated 11/14.11.2005 passed by the Additional District Education Officer (Basic), Almora, annexed as Annexure CA-1 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
So far as other reliefs are concerned, the learned Counsel for the petitioners have stated that similar controversy have been decided by this Court in writ petition No. 3615 of 2001(S/S) and in writ petition No. 1243 of 2001(S/S), wherein direction was made to the respondents to pay difference of pay alongwith consequential benefits to the petitioners within a period of six weeks after receiving the certified copy of this order.
The petitioners were appointed as untrained teachers in different districts, the only dispute is of difference of pay scale which is payable to the petitioners.
Learned Brief Holder for the state fairly considered that the similar controversy had already been decided by this Court in the subsequent writ petition No. 437 of 2003(S/S), Chandra Kishor Mehra and 13 Ors. v. State of Uttaranchal and Ors. which also decided on the basis of earlier petitions referred above.
The Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 437 of 2003(S/S), Chandra Kishor Mehra & 13 others v. State of Uttaranchal and Ors. has been affirmed in Special Appeal No. 98 (Defective) of 2004, State of Uttaranchal v. Chandra Kishor Mehra and Ors..
Since, the petitioners have also been appointed subsequent to the Government Order dated 23.03.1995, the controversy is squarely covered by the judgment of His Lordship Hon''ble Mr. Justice M.M. Ghildiyal in Writ Petition No. 3615 of 2001 (S/S), in writ petition No. 1243 of 2001(S/S) and in Special Appeal No. 98 (Defective) of 2004.
The writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay the difference of pay alongwith consequential benefits to the petitioners within the period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
All pending applications stand disposed of.