HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1078 of 2025 (S/S) Smt. Mudita Rawat ….......Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others …..... Respondents Present : Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Chandra Shekhar Dalakoti, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Narain Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3. JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The main challenge in this petition is made to the impugned order dated 16.06.2025, passed by respondent no.3, the District Education Officer, Chamoli, by which, the appointment/candidature of the petitioner has been rejected and she has been directed to Show Cause within a week. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that an identical issue has been involved in WPSS No.1067 of 2025, in which, an interim order has already been passed by the Court. 4. On this aspect, learned State Counsel has also submitted arguments. 2 5. The parties were heard at length. At the end, learned State Counsel submits that since the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order, the matter may be remitted back to the authority concerned, so that the petitioner may be afforded an opportunity of hearing and, thereafter, a reasoned and speaking order may be passed. He submits that a fresh notice may be given to the petitioner by the respondent authority within a week from the date of passing of the order of this Court. He submits that once the response is filed by the petitioner to the Show Cause Notice, within next two weeks, a decision shall be taken on it by the respondents. 6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that if such an opportunity is given to the petitioner, prior to it, the impugned order has to be set aside. He further submits that in response to the Show Cause Notice that may be given to the petitioner by the respondents, the petitioner may be given liberty to raise all the defences, that are available to him. 7. The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned counsel for the parties. 3 8. By the impugned order, the appointment/candidature of the petitioner has been cancelled and, thereafter, he was given a Show Cause Notice. Apparently, the impugned order has been passed, in defiance to the principles of natural justice. It is the case of the petitioner that she had already been appointed as Assistant Teacher; she was functioning and suddenly, by the impugned order, her candidature/appointment has been cancelled. 9. In view of the statement given by learned State Counsel, the impugned order is set aside. The respondents shall give a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner within a week. Within two weeks, thereafter, the petitioner shall submit his response to the Show Cause Notice raising all the defences available to him and, thereafter, in the next two weeks, the matter may be decided. 10. With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 30.06.2025 Sanjay SANJAY KANOJIA Digitally signed by SANJAY KANOJIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=e50e50b49596520698eff87e0a08bb d504686df4d1afc60f54a287831dec46fe, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26EEB7122ED0DD23233A255D D8EC450A84B515A087CAEFD1B3179A7DEAE 40699, cn=SANJAY KANOJIA Date: 2025.07.01 18:06:46 +05'30'