SURENDRA SINGH PANWAR; ASHA RAM CHAMOLI; ANIL KUMAR; NAGENDRA SINGH KANDARI; VIMAL PRAKASH; SATYENDRA RAWAT; CHANDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners before this Court are Graduates in Physical Education. All of them have a degree, which is known as Bachelor Degree in Physical Education (from hereinafter referred to as "BP.Ed."). In a selection process initiated as far back as in the year 2004 for the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade (Physical Education), the required qualification, as per the advertisement was a Bachelor degree from recognized University and Diploma in Physical Education. Since the candidature of the petitioners were not being considered, as they were Graduates in Physical Education, which was not the requirement for the post of Assistant Teacher, as per the advertisement, they were constrained to file a writ petition before this Court, being WPSS No. 95 of 2009, in which initially an interim order was passed vide order dated 06.07.2009 by the learned Single Judge of this Court, but as it was not extended later, the petitioner (in WPSS No. 95 of 2009) filed an Special Appeal No. 240 of 2009 before the Division Bench of this Court. While considering the matter, the Division Bench of this Court in SPA No. 240 of 2009, summoned the records of WPSS No. 95 of 2009 as well and both the cases were heard and decided together by a common order dated 08.03.2010. The Division Bench of this Court held that the petitioners were also eligible since they were holding Degree in the same stream i.e. Physical Education. The operative portion of the same reads as under:-

(2.) As a result of the above order in special appeal some of the BP.Ed. candidates were considered against 26 posts, which were for General category candidates, and were selected. Consequently, some of the Diploma Holders who were selected earlier had to be removed from the list of selected candidates.

(3.) The Diploma Holders, who were removed from the list of selected candidates filed a writ petitions before this Court and the learned Single Judge of this Court passed an interim order dated 08.10.2010 in favour of such petitioners and stayed the operation and effect of the order dated 28.09.2010 by which the services of the petitioners were removed.