IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Writ Petition No. 2011 (M/S) of 2008 Committee of Management, R.M.P.P.V. Inter College, Gurukul Narsan, Haridwar, Through its Manager. ……………………Petitioner. Versus (1) State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Education Civil Secretariat, Dehradun. (2) Director School Education, Mayur Vihar, Dehradun. (3) Additional Director Education, Garhwal Region, Pauri Garhwal. (4) District Education Officer, Haridwar. (5) Ramesh Pal Singh, S/o Sri Atar Singh, R/o Village Mohmmandpur Jat, District Haridwar. ……..Respondents Sri Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Sri K.P. Upadhyay, A.C.S.C. for the respondents no. 1 to 4. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard Sri Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.P. Upadhyay, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, for the respondents no. 1 to 4. (2) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 23.10.2008, passed by respondent no. 3 (copy of which is annexure 11 to this writ petition). (3) The same order was challenged by the writ petitioner in the earlier round of litigation through Writ Petition No. 1962 of 2008 (M/S). The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 06.11.2008, which reads as under:- “Heard learned counsel for the parties. (2) The impugned order dated 23.10.2008 (copy annexure – 9 to the writ petition), challenged in this writ petition appears to have been passed in compliance of the order of that very date i.e. 23.10.2008, passed in writ petition No. 7186 of 2001 (S/S) Ramesh Pal Singh Vs. RMPPV College Gurukul Narsan, Haridwar. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was intervener in writ petition No. 7186 of 2001 (S/S). And on 23.10.2008, concerned bench has observed in the writ petition No. 7186 of 2001 (S/S) as under :- “A short counter affidavit has been filed today by the learned Standing Counsel, which shows that vide order dated 23.10.2008, passed by Mr. N.K. Bahuguna Joint Director Education, Garhwal Region, Pauri Garhwal the order dated 21.10.2008 passed by this Court for single operation in the institution has been complied with. The same is taken on record. ” The impugned order appears to have been passed in compliance of court’s order, quoted above. (4) In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to seek remedy available to him. The writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid observations. (Stay Application No. 7288 of 2008, stands dismissed).” (4) In view of the above order, this second writ petition on same cause of action is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed summarily. The writ petition is dismissed summarily. (Stay Application No. 7690 of 2008 also stands dismissed). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 25.11.2008 NS