IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 378 of 2009 (S/S) Smt. Reva Khetwal D/O Pratap Singh and another …… Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Education, Dehradun and others. … Respondents. Mr. K.N.Joshi, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondents. Date July 21, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the salary/honorarium to the petitioners on the post of Shiksha Mitra in their respective place of posting from the date of up-gradation of Education Guarantee Centre to Primary School. Prayer for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefits of Government Orders dated 28-6-2006 and 15-12- 2006 to the petitioners has also been made. The petitioners claim to have been appointed as Shiksha Acharya/Shiksha Anudeshak under the Education Guarantee Programme in different Education Guarantee Centre as mentioned in paragraph no. 2 of the memo of writ petition. They also claim to be fully eligible for absorption on the post of Shiksha Mitra. The petitioners also claim to have obtained training as required for the post of Shiksha Mitra and were given certificates to that effect. They also claim that they are entitled to the benefit of G.O. dated 28-6-2006 and to get honorarium of Rs. 4000/- per month admissible to Shiksha Mitra. 2 The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents had withheld their salary of Shiksha Mitra illegally, though they were legally appointed as Shiksha Mitra on 6-2-2008 and 1-7-2007 respectively. On behalf of the respondents counter affidavit has been filed. It is stated that the Shiksha Acharya/Anudeshak, who were eligible to be appointed as Shiksha Mitra have already been adjusted on the post of Shiksha Mitra as per Government Order dated 14-2-2008, but the petitioners possessing qualification of Intermediate are not eligible. In the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the order dated 2-6-2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 41 of 2010(S/S), Bala Datt Sharma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and have pondered over the matter. I have also perused the order dated 2-6-2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 41 of 2010(S/S), Bala Datt Sharma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others and it has been held by the learned Single Judge of this Court that once a school has been upgraded as a primary school, teachers are required to be appointed under the provisions of the Act. Undisputedly, the petitioners were absorbed on the post of Shiksha Mitra in compliance of the Government Order dated 28-6-2006 and 15-12-2006. The Additional District Education Officer (Basic) Bageshwar in his order dated 5-2-2008 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) has specifically observed that the petitioners would be required to complete their graduation within a period of three years from the date of their provisional appointment as Shiksha Mitra. It is also undisputed that the petitioners are continuing on the post of Shiksha Mitra in compliance of interim order dated 29-4-2009 passed by this Court. 3 In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be in the fitness of things that the petitioners may be permitted to continue to work as Shiksha Mitra in their respective primary school till a regular Assistant Teacher is appointed by the State Government in the school and the petitioners shall also be entitled to the honorarium as admissible to Shiksha Mitra as per Government Orders issued from time to time. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. ( B.S.Verma, J. ) RCP