IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 159 of 2006 State of Uttaranchal and others …….. …… Appellants Versus Kundan Lal & another ....……… Respondents Coram:- Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Present: Mr. B.K. Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. None for the respondent No.1. Mr. Pankaj Bisht, Advocate for Mr. N.S. Negi, Advocate for the respondent No.2. Date of Decision: 22.02.2010 J.S. Khehar, C.J. (Oral) Trough the instant special appeal, the appellants have assailed the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 22.12.2005 disposing of Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1263 of 2004. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the appellants, that admission was granted to respondent No.1 under an interim order passed by this Court. It is submitted that the impugned order dated 22.12.2005 disposing of Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1263 of 2004 has given finality to the interim order, without considering the merits of the claim of the rival parties. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants has also invited our attention the decision rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court in another controversy pertaining to respondent No.1 (wherein respondent No.1 had approached this Court by filing Civil Writ Petition (S/S) No. 22 of 2006 assailing the action of respondents in having terminated his services on the basis of deficiency in the prescribed educational qualifications). It is submitted that the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 was dismissed. This Court in the aforesaid case arrived at the conclusion, that the qualification acquired by respondent No.1, namely, 2 certificate of Physical Education from Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati, Maharashtra had been de-recognised, and as such he could not validly contest the action of the authorities in terminating his services. 3. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants, we are satisfied that in view of the decision rendered by this Court disposing of Civil Writ Petition (S/S) No.22 of 2006 (vide order dated 09.05.2006) the respondent has no jurisdiction to press the prayer made in writ Petition (S/S) No.1263 of 2004. In view of the judgment rendered in Civil Writ Petition (S/S) No.22 of 2006 (which according to learned counsel for the appellants, had attained finality as the same was not assailed by respondent No.1 herein), we are satisfied that the prayer made in the instant special appeal deserves to be accepted. 4. In view of the above, the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge, disposing of Writ Petition (S/S) No.1263 of 2004, dated 22.12.2005, is hereby set aside. (Sudhanshu Dhulia,J.) ( J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 22.02.2010 P.Singh