M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. Heard Mr. N.K. Prasad, learned ST. counsel for the petitioner Mr. B.S. Lal learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State and Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 9.

2. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order and direction as contained in letter bearing No. 48 dated 30.12.2000 issued by the respondent No. 5, Commissioner, Water Resources, Irrigation Department, whereby the respondent No. 8. Headmaster of River Valley Project High School at Tenughat was directed to Act in violation of the judgment passed in CWJC No. 1817/ 95(R). LPA No. 243/95 (R) and Civil Review Nos. 66 and 83 of 1984 (R).

3. After hearing the parties at length, the only question that arose for consideration is which teacher of the school is entitled to become the headmaster of the said school. Mr. N.K. Prasad, on the one hand submitted that in spite of judicial pronouncement to the effect that the respondent No. 9 is not entitled to become the headmaster, the respondents are bent upon to make respondent No. 9 the headmaster of the school. On the other hand, the contention of the counsel appearing for the respondents is that there