Suraj Juyal And Ors v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier the identical issue has come up before the Hon’ble Apex Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court, by order dated 10.12.2024, passed in Civil Appeal No. 7873 of 2023, “Vishwanath and Others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, passed the following order: “1. The grievance sought to be raised on behalf of review petitioners and some of the applicants before this Court is that though they were in employment and covered by the recognition order dated 22.09.2017, they believe that the judgment and order of this Court dated 28.11.2023 (hereinafter 'judgment under review') would come in their way if they want to make better their prospects by applying either in other institutions or for promotional avenues.

2. We have already clarified in the judgment under review that the one-time scheme was provided solely to safeguard the interests of those teachers who were employed as on 10.08.2017. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain the present review petitions as well as miscellaneous applications.

3. However, to avoid any confusion, we again clarify that the 18 months diploma obtained by such persons, who were in employment as on 10.08.2017 and who have completed the diploma course of 18 months, would be treated as valid diploma holders for the purpose of applying in other institutions promotional avenues. 2 4. Needless to state that the clarification will be effective from the date of pronouncement of the judgment under review.

5. With the aforesaid clarification, the review 3 petition(s) as well as all miscellaneous applications, including all the pending applications, are disposed of.” On perusal of the aforesaid order, it reveals that the Hon’ble Apex Court clarified that 18 months diploma obtained by such person, who were in employment as on 10.08.2017 and who have completed the Diploma Course of 18 months, would be treated as valid diploma holders for the purpose of applying in other institutions or for promotional avenues. It is also made clear in this order that the aforesaid clarification will be effective from the date of pronouncement of the judgment under review. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits pronouncement of the judgment under review was of dated

28.11.2023.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that these petitioners obtained 18 months Diploma and they were on employment as on 10.08.2017, and as such, in view of the clarification as given by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the petitioners would be treated as valid Diploma Holders for the purpose of employment in other institutions.

4. Subsequently, for seeking the relief as per the clarification order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the two writ petitions i.e. WPSS No.2419 of 2024 and WPSS No.04 of 2025 were preferred before this Court. Subsequently, a Transfer Petition Nos.42-43 of 2025, was preferred before the Hon’ble Apex Court. On the said Transfer Petition, both the writ petitions were also disposed of on 05.03.2025 and while disposing of the Transfer Petition, the Hon’ble Apex Court directed to the State 3 Government to consider the claim of the applicants, who were the petitioners the aforesaid writ petition filed earlier accordance with the clarification given by order dated 10.12.2024 with further direction that if the applicants are found to be eligible to appoint them in accordance with law. The relevant extracts of the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Transfer Petition dated 05.03.2025 are being extracted herein as below:-

3. We further find that the grievance of the petitioner(s) as raised in the writ petitions would stand satisfied with the aforesaid observations. Consequently, the writ petition WPSS/04/2025 pending before the High Court of Uttarakhand stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order. Nos. WPSS/2411/2024 On perusal of the aforesaid order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Transfer Petition dated 05.03.2025, in para Nos.23 and 24, the directions have been issued to the State Government to consider the claim of the applicants in accordance with the clarification dated 10th December, 2024, and if the applicants are found to be eligible, to appoint them in accordance with law. A period was also stipulated therein that the entire exercise be completed within three months from the date of pronouncement of the judgment. Apart from this, in para No.24 the Hon’ble Apex Court further clarify that the State Government would not reopen the selection already conducted, which has reached finality.

5. Now the instant petition has been preferred by the petitioners with this contention that they all are having all the eligibility and are eligible for appointment for the post of Assistant Teacher in the Primary Institution in view of the clarification as given by the Hon’ble Apex Court in its judgment 4 under review dated 10.12.2024 and as such the respondents be directed to consider their claim for appointment in view of the subsequent direction of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 05.03.2025 passed in Transfer Petition Nos.42-43 of 2025.

6. Apart from this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the selection process is going on, which was initiated pursuant to the advertisement dated 10.06.2024 and has not been concluded, therefore, the rider as stipulated in the order dated

05.03.2025 passed in Transfer Petition Nos.42-43 of 2025 as reflected from para No.24 wherein it is clarified that the State Government would not reopen the selection already conducted which has reached finality, will not come into their way since the selection process is still going on and have not attained finality.

7. On the order side Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel have not disputed this fact that the selection process is still going on and has not attained finality, which has been initiated pursuant to the advertisement dated 10.06.2024. Apart from this, learned State counsel has not disputed this fact also that the Hon’ble Apex Court in its judgment dated 10.12.2024, clarified that the incumbents, who have completed the diploma course for 18 Months and who were in employment as on 10.08.2017, would be treated as valid diploma holders for the purposes of applying in other institution or for promotional avenues.

8. Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, fairly submits that in the subsequent judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 05.03.2025, the directions have been issued to the State Government to consider the claim of the applicants in accordance with the order of clarification of Hon’ble Apex Court dated 10.12.2024, 5 Since now, the selection process is still going on, which

9. was initiated pursuant to the advertisement dated 10.06.2024, and, furthermore, the Hon’ble Apex Court has already clarified in its order dated 10.06.2024 that the candidates who were having the 18 months’ diploma and were in employment as on

10.08.2017, would be treated to be the valid diploma holders.

10. In such an eventuality, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally with the directions to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in the ongoing selection process initiated pursuant to the advertisement dated 10.06.2024 by treating each of the petitioner to be having a valid diploma since they have completed the diploma course of 18 months and who were in employment as on 10.08.2017 and if they are suitable in all purposes and declared to be qualified in the selection process, they may be also given the appointment.

11. Apart from this, it is also made clear that if the petitioners are having the 18 months’ diploma in terms of the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 10.06.2024 and were on employment as on 10.08.2017, should be treated to be having valid diploma holders.

12. Subject to the observations as made above, the present writ petition is disposed of finally. . (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)

09.04.2025 R.Bisht 6