IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 22 of 2010 Mrs. Vijay Lakshmi ….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents. Sri Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate present for the petitioner. Sri N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel present for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate present for the petitioner as well as Sri N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel present for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner who was working as an Education Instructor in the Education Guarantee Scheme Centre Belgarh, Block Ramnagar, District Nainital was appointed in the year 2004 and since then was regularly working as such. The petitioner relies on Government Order dated 14.2.2008 which says that once the Education Guarantee Centre is upgraded into a primary school then such instructors, as the present petitioner, who have education qualification for appointment as “Shiksha Mitra” and whose initial appointment has been recommended by “Village Shiksha Samiti” will be appointed as “Shiksha Mitra”. All the same, instead of appointing the petitioner as “Shiksha Mitra”, her appointment has been cancelled by order dated 22.7.2009 (Annexure no. 1 to the writ petition) passed by the Principal, Government Primary School, Kanchanpur Chhoi, Ramnagar, District Nainital. It is this order the petitioner has challenged. Further he has also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as “Shiksha Mitra”. The main reliance the petitioner has placed is on a Government Order dated 14.2.2008 (Annexure no. 9 to the writ petition). As per the said government order once Education Guarantee Scheme Centre is upgraded to a primary school, then such “Acharyas” and instructors who are 2 imparting education at such centres and who have minimum education qualifications for appointment to the post of “Shiksha Mitra” and whose appointment is recommended by “Village Shiksha Samiti” in accordance with law shall be appointed as “Shiksha Mitra”. In its counter affidavit the contention of the State is that once an Education Guarantee Scheme Centre is upgraded to a primary school and regular teachers have been appointed on these posts by way of transfer or by fresh appointment, the candidature of petitioner cannot be considered as “Siksha Mitra” as there is no post of “Shiksha Mitra” in the school. This argument of the State appears to be misconceived inasmuch as the State has not challenged the existence of Government Order dated 14.2.2008. The Government Order dated 14.2.2008 clearly stipulates that once an Education Guarantee Scheme Centre is upgraded to a primary school then such instructors, as the petitioner, who have minimum qualification of “Shiksha Mitra and whose candidatures are recommended by “Village Shiksha Samiti” will be appointed as “Shiksha Mitra”. As such a mandamus is being issued to respondent no. 2 which is Director of School Education, Uttarakhand, Dehradun to appoint the petitioner as “Shiksha Mitra” forthwith in accordance with Government Order dated 14.2.2008. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 7.6.2011 Avneet