IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1622 (SS) of 2011 Km. Mamta Semwal and another …Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. M.S. Bhandari, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Purohit, Advocate present for the petitioners. Mr. N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel present for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent nos. 1 to 3. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate present for respondent no. 4. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. M.S. Bhandari, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Purohit, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for respondent no. 4. 2. The main contention of the petitioners before this Court is that they have not been given the quality point marks of a course, namely, B.Ed. (Bachelor of Education). According to the petitioners, the quality point marks for this qualification, which the petitioners were liable to be given, but the same has been wrongly denied to them, consequently, they have not been selected. 3. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate appearing for respondent no. 4 states that similar controversy has been resolved by this Court in Writ Petition No. 614 (SS) of 2011 (Manjeet Singh and others Versus State of Uttarakhand and others) where the claim of the petitioners was rejected and this fact has also been admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. This writ petition therefore, being similar in nature, stands dismissed in terms of Writ Petition no. 614 (SS) of 2011. 5. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) Dated: 22.11.2011 VKG