HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI Writ Petition (M/ S) 2839 of 2023

3^RD September, 2025 Committee of Management --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others --Respondents with Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2471 of 2025 Writ Petition (S/ S) No. 968 of 2024 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2986 of 2024 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 11 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 20 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 1396 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 1501 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 1605 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 1888 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 1890 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2414 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2415 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2416 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2424 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2425 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2426 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2427 of 2025 Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2523 of 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Yogesh Kumar Pacholia, Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Mr. Parikshit Saini, Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, Mr. Navnish Negi, Mr. Himanshu Aswal and Mr. Sagar Kothari, Advocates for the petitioners.

Mr. N.S. Pundir, Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. N.K. Papnoi &

Mr. Narain Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT

Committee of Management of different Government Aided Educational Institutions have approached this Court challenging the instructions issued by the State Government regarding appointment against teaching as well as non-teaching posts in Government Aided Secondary and Senior Secondary Schools.

2. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these writ petitions, therefore they are heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2839 of 2023 alone are being considered and discussed. The relief sought in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2839 of 2023 are as follows:-

“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 19.09.2023 passed by respondent no. 1 (contained as Annexure No. 19 to this writ petition).

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 4 to intimate the dates for interview and panel of subject experts so that the ongoing recruitment process be completed for the benefit of the students.”

3. Petitioner has challenged order issued by Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of Uttarakhand, on 19.09.2023, by which ban on appointment against teaching and non-teaching positions in Government Aided Educational Institutions was imposed, till further orders. The reason for imposing ban, as culled out from the order is that in the past, complaints were received that selection and appointments in Aided Schools are not fair and are made for considerations other than merit.

4. Petitioner has challenged the ban imposed vide Government Order dated 19.09.2023 mainly on the ground that similar ban, earlier imposed by Director General, School Education on 10.11.2022, was set aside by Coordinate Bench vide judgment dated 16.08.2023 passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3231 of 2022. Paragraph nos. 9 & 10 of the judgment dated

16.08.2023, are extracted below:-

“9. A bare reading of Section 36 of the Act, make it abundantly clear that at various stages, District Education Officer is involved. In fact, prior to issuing the advertisement and even after applications are received in response to the advertisement the District Education Officer is involved. The quality marks are to be allotted by the District Education Officer.

10. This Court is not required to adjudicate on any complaint that were received, with regard to any particular appointment in any aided school. If there were complaints, the competent authority could have examined them and take required action in a particular matter. But, putting a complete ban, without