SECRETARY, UTTARAKHAND BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION v. SRI UPENDRA PALARIYA
SPA/687/2017 · 2025-05-01
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Vivek Bharti Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1402 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1402 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:3350-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
SPA No. 687 of 2017 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.
Ms. Neeti Rana,
learned counsel appearing for appellant.
2. Mr. D. S. Bora, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
3. Mr. Ishwari Dutt Paliwal, learned counsel for writ petitioner (respondent no.1 herein).
4.
Learned counsel appearing for writ petitioner (respondent no.1 herein) makes a statement at Bar that subsequent to passing of the impugned judgment, his client was offered appointment of Assistant Teacher (Primary) and he has now been serving as Assistant Teacher (Primary) in Education Department, District Nainital. He, thus, submits that in view of the subsequent development, this special appeal has become infructuous.
5. In view of the statement made by
learned counsel for the writ petitioner (respondent no.1 herein), the special appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
01.05.2025 SS/Akash