COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT SRI GURUNANAK PUBLIC MAHILA INTER COLLEGE v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPMS/3572/2024 · 2025-05-01
Ravindra Maithani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13609 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13609 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 3572 of 2024 (M/S)
Committee of Management, Sri Gurunanak public Mahila Inter College and another
….......Petitioners Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others ……..... Respondents Present : Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Mahendra Singh Bisht, Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos.1 to 5.
JUDGMENT
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
It is the case of the petitioners that they run Sri Gurunanak Public Mahila Inter College in Dehradun (“the College”). There are many vacancies in the College, but the respondent no.5, the Chief Education Officer, Dehradun is not according permission and, in fact, his communication dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure No.1 to the writ petition), the petitioners have been communicated that no directions have been received by the respondent no.5 in this regard.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment and order of this Court passed on 08.04.2025 in WPMS No.1007 of 2025, Committee of Management, R.S. Dhillon Janta Inter College vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. He would submit that the College is short of Teachers; the respondent no.5, the Chief Education Officer has the statutory responsibility to take a decision on the process of
2 recruitment, which he is withholding. He would submit the petitioners have already given representations, which are pending. He would submit that the petitioners may be given liberty to make a fresh representation with the directions to the respondent no.5 to take a decision on it within a stipulated time.
4.
Learned State counsel would submit that the respondent no.5, the Chief Education Officer would take a decision on the representation that may be filed by the petitioners within a period of four weeks.
5.
The Court takes on record the statement given by learned State Counsel.
6.
The petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondent no.5, the Chief Education Officer within a period of one week with further direction to the respondent no.5, the Chief Education Officer to take a decision on it within a period of next four weeks.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
01.05.2025 Sanjay