(1.) In spite of time being granted, no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. However, a recall application has been filed by the District Education Officer, Udham Singh Nagar (respondent no. 4) to recall the order of the Court dated 21st March, 2012, by which, the Court directed the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, to issue appropriate orders to suspend the District Education Officer with immediate effect. The recall application states that the District Education Officer was suspended by an order dated 29.03.2012. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition, in brief, is that the petitioner was working as an Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) at Pithoragarh, and by an order of 3rd June, 2011, was transferred from Pithoragarh to Udham Singh Nagar. It was alleged that in spite of the transfer order, the petitioner was not relieved, which compelled him to file the Writ Petition No. 1301 (S/S) of 2011. The Court, by an order of 27th September, 2011 directed the Additional District Education Officer, Pithoragarh to relieve the petitioner forthwith to his transferred place at Udham Singh Nagar. It has come on record that pursuant to the order of the Court dated 27th September, 2011, the petitioner was relieved and he joined the place of transfer at Udham Singh Nagar on 29.10.2011. Since then the petitioner is working at Udham Singh Nagar. By an order of 31st of January, 2012 passed by Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, a general order was passed, directing that all those persons who have been transferred outside the district, would be transferred back, and based on the said order of 31st of Janurary, 2012, the District Education Officer, passed order dated 14.02.2012, directing the petitioner to join the place of transfer, at Pithoragarh. The petitioner, being aggrieved, filed the present writ petition, contending that his transfer, back to Pithoragarh, was in gross violation of the interim order of the Court, and that having joined the place of transfer, should not be transferred again or sent back within a space of a few months. The petitioner also contended and prayed that he has not been paid his salary since he had joined at Udham Singh Nagar and a mandamus to that effect should also be issued.
(2.) This Court, while entertaining the writ petition, had directed the respondents to give the reasons as to why the petitioner is again being transferred when the Court had directed the respondents to relieve the petitioners in the earlier round of litigation. The Court also directed the respondents to indicate as to why the salary had not been released for the last seven months. No reply was given and the Court by an order dated 21st March, 2012, while directing the competent authority to suspend the District Education Officer, also directed the respondents to file a counter affidavit. Till date, no counter affidavit has been filed.
(3.) Sri Subhash Upadhyay, the learned Brief Holder of the State and also appearing for the respondent no.4 made a fervent plea that the salary of the petitioner has been released by the Additional District Education Officer as well as the Finance Officer, working in the Office of Additional District Education Officer, on 22nd March, 2012, and that the District Education Officer upon coming to know of the earlier interim order of the Court, did not relieve the petitioner pursuant to the transfer order dated 31st January, 2012 or of his own order dated 14th February, 2012, and allowed the petitioner to continue to work at Udham Singh Nagar. The District Education Officer has given an unconditional apology while contending that he was unaware of the order passed in the earlier Writ Petition No. 1301 (S/S) of 2011 and that he was not the competent authority to release the salary of the petitioner inasmuch as the competent authority was the Additional District Education Officer as well as the Finance Officer.;