IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Application for direction No. 11427 of 2009 Interim Relief Application No.3390 of 2010 In Writ Petition No. 1154 of 2009 (M/S) Mukesh Sharma. ……Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ….Respondents. Mr. Kishore Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. C.S.C. for the State. Dated: -11-05-2010 Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- (I) writ rule or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 30-06-2009 (Annexure –2) issued by respondent No.2 and its operation and effect also along with cancellation order of candidature of the petitioner dated 20-5-2009 (Annexure-3) along with its effect and operation also. (II) Writ rule or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding to the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete his Special B.T.C. Course by allowing him to participate in the Theoretical Training of Special B.T.C. Course at District Education and Training Center, Ramnagar Rookee, District Haridwar and to allow him to appear in examination. (III) Issue any other direction or order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 2 (IV) Award costs of the writ petition to the petitioner. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that according to the petitioner, he is a permanent resident of Village Panjara Nichla Patti Gujru, P.O. Sirerikhal, Tehsil Doomakote, District Pauri Garhwal and being fully qualified was subsequently selected to undergo the Special B.T.C. Training Course in the year 2007-2008 in District Education and Training Institute Charigaon, Pauri Garhwal. The petitioner completed his practical training of Special B.T.C. from primary school Panda Vikas Khsetra Naini Danda from 20-07-2007 to 30-04-2008, annexed as annexure Nos. 5 and 6 to the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner had completed the practical training of Special B.T.C. but due to illness during the period when he was undergoing the theoretical training, he could not completed his theoretical training and when he applied for the admission for completion of his theoretical training, it was denied to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that the after the direction of this Court vide order dated 30-07- 2009, the petitioner joined the D.I.E.T, Roorkee for the theoretical training of the Special B.T.C. The certificate has also been issued by the Principal, D.I.E.T, Roorkee, District-Haridwar to this effect that the petitioner had completed his theoretical training of Special B.T.C. The counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 6 and it has been stated in the counter affidavit that no plausible explanation has been given by the petitioner to remain absent on the ground of illness. By the interim order dated 30-07-2009 passed by this Court, the petitioner got admission in D.I.E.T. Roorkee, and 3 completed his theoretical training and appear in the examination which was subsequent to such a training but the result of the petitioner was not declared. The similar controversy was decided on 04-11-2009 by this Court and allowed the Writ Petition No. 1351 of 2009 (M/S), Mamta Singh VS. State of Uttarakhand and others, and direction was given to declared the result of the petitioner. At the case at hand, the similar controversy is involved in the present writ petition. The order dated 30-06-2009 and order dated 20-5-2009 are liable to be set aside and the mandamus is issued to the respondents to declared the result of the petitioner of such theoretical training of Special B.T.C. With the above observations and direction, the writ petition is allowed. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. (B.S.Verma, J.) 11-05-2010 MK