Meena Kadakoti vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Hon''ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.—Heard Mr. M.S. Pal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Bisht, learned Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for respondent no. 3.

The contention of the petitioner is that though she was selected as Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade (Sanskrit) but she has not been given appointment.

Learned counsels for the respondents state that the present writ petition be disposed of at the admission stage itself with the appropriate direction to the Director School Education, Uttarakhand, Dehradun (respondent no. 2) to decide the representation of the petitioner.

As such, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that if the petitioner moves a representation before the Director, School Education, Uttarakhand, Dehradun (respondent no. 2) within a week from today, the same shall be decided by the said authority by a speaking order explaining as to why the petitioner though has been selected and has not been given appointment. It shall be decided within three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. Till such representation is decided by the said authority, one post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade (Sanskrit) shall be kept vacant for the petitioner, which shall be subject to the decision taken on the representation of the petitioner.

No order as to costs.