- (1.) J. C. S. Rawat, J. 1. Since both the appeals are aris ing but of the judgment and order dated 09-05-2006 passed by the learned Sin gle Judge of this Court and involve, the common question of fact and law, there fore, the appeals are being decided by the common judgment.
(2.) THESE special appeals under Rule 5 Chapter VIII of the Huh Court Rules have been filed against the judgment and order dated 09-05-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 22 of 2006 (S/ S), Kundan Lal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and others and Civil Writ Petition No. 35 of 2006 (S/s), Km. Devki Vs. State of Uttaranchal and others whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed both the petitions. Civil writ petitions bearing No. 22 of 2006 (S/s) and 35 of 2006 (S/s) were filed before the learned Single Judge by the petitioners- Kundan Lal and Km. Devki for the following reliefs : i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24- 12-2005 passed by the respondent No. 1 (Annexed as, Annexure No. 1 to the writ peti tion ). ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus com manding the Respondents to per mit the petitioners'to work as Assistant Teacher at Primary School, Badiyakot Shetra/ Dulag Shetra, Kapkot, District -Bageshwar. iii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus com manding the Respondent No. 3 to provide the petitioners the original Marksheet and Certifi cate of Special B. T. C. training, iv. To issue any other order or di rection which this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. v. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioners. The writ petitioners (appellants) had obtained certificate of Physical Edu cation from Sri Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra after 1997. In pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Princi pal, District Education and Training In stitute, Almora the petitioners applied for the Special B. T. C. Training Course for the year 2005. As per the advertisement, the candidates were required to possess qualification of graduation and also must have obtained B. Ed. , L. T. , C. P. Ed. , D. R Ed, or B. R Ed, as regular candidates from the institutions recog nized by the State of U. P. or State of Uttaranchal. It was also provided in the advertisement that the candidates who had completed C. P. Ed, before 1997 would be eligible for the said course. The petitioners challenging the said condi tion, filed writ petitions before this Court and this Court vide order dated 01-09-2003 in Writ Petition No. 169 of 2003 (S/s) and Order dated 04-11-2004 in Writ Petition No. 1263 of 2004 (S/s.) directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to complete their training in Special B. T. C. Course. After completion of the training of the petitioners, they were appointed as Assistant Teacher in primary schools. However, vide order dated 24- 12-2005 the appointment of the petitioners were cancelled on the ground that the certificates obtained by them were not recognized. Feeling ag grieved by the said order, the writ peti tioners (appellants) filed the writ peti tions before this court.
(3.) IN both the writ petitions coun ter affidavit has been filed by the Addi tional District Education Officer (Basic), Bageshwar in which it has been stated that the appointment given to the peti tioners (appellants) was temporary ap pointment in view of the interim order passed by this court in the writ petitions filed by the writ petitioners. It was fur ther pleaded that the writ petitioners (ap pellants) had obtained the C. R Ed, after the year 1997 from Sri Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra and they were not eligible to the B. T. C. Training Course. It was further pleaded that the State of U. P. is sued a G. O. dated 23-05-1995 by which the recognition of C. P. Ed, from Sri Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra was cancelled. It was further pleaded that the State of Uttaranchal also issued a G. O. on 13-11-2001 wherein it had been provided that only regular candidates would be treated qualified with the aforesaid C. R Ed. , provided they had obtained the said certificate till 1997. It was further pleaded that the Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 47 of 2005, Usha Rawat and another Vs. State of Uttaranchal and others, decided on 29-07-2005 2005 (2) U. D. , 141. held that the writ petitioners who had obtained cer tificate of C. R Ed, from Sri Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra after 1997 had no legal right to continue in the service. IN that Special appeal the writ petitioners had also obtained the certificate of C. R Ed, from Sri Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra after 1997, as such, their services were rightly dispensed with. After hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions and came to the conclusion that the writ petitioners had admittedly obtained C. REd, degree after 1997 from Sri Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra and they had no legal right to get admission in the Spe cial B. T. C. Course conducted by the re spondents. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions holding that the controversy involved in the writ petitions was squarely covered with the contro versy involved in Special Appeal No. 47 0/2005, Km. Usha Rawat and another (Supra), -decided by the Division Bench of this Court.;