THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 431 of 2010 Reeta Ramola D/O Rukam Chand Ramola. … Petitioner. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and two others. …Respondents. Mr. K.N.Joshi, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondents. Date August 16, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner files rejoinder affidavit. The same is taken on record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefits to the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra in view of the Government Orders dated 28-6-2006, 15-12-2006 and 21-8-2007. The petitioner has also sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the salary/honorarium to the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra in view of the said Government Orders from the date when the Education Guarantee Centre Sangaon was upgraded as Primary School. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to adjust/absorb the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra in view of the Government Orders referred to above. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is working against the sanctioned post of Shiksha Mitra but she is not being paid honorarium admissible to Shiksha Mitra. In the counter affidavit, the State has denied the fact that the petitioner is working as Shiksha Mitra. In reply thereto, the petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit and in paragraph no. 6 thereof it is inter alia stated as under:- 2 “The petitioner is continuously working as Shiksha Mitra in the upgraded Education Guarantee Centre Sungaon (Saur) as Primary School. However, it is stated that in the upgraded it is stated that in the upgraded Primary School as mentioned by the government order dated 27.12.2007 against one post one regular teacher is working and against another post of Shiksha Mitra, the petitioner is continuously working as Shiksha Mitra in Primary School Sungaon (Saur). The Government order dated 27.12.2007 is already filed by the respondent as CA-1 to the counter affidavit.” The petitioner has annexed the letter issued by the respondent no. 3 as Annexure No.5 to the writ petition to Village Education Committee, Kshetra Chamba, District Tehri Garhwal, wherein it is directed that the formalities of contract of Shiksha Acharya posted in E.G.S. Centre Sungaon be completed as Shiksha Mitra and be forwarded to the respondent no.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner in similar writ petition No. WPSS No. 428 of 2010, which has been disposed of today by this Court, has also annexed the letter No. 124 XXIV(1)/08/37/2006 dated 26th May 2008 of the Additional Secretary, Uttarakhand Shasan to show that the Government Order dated 27-12-2007 was maintained. The controversy involved in this writ petition is almost identical to that of WPSS No. 428 of 2010, Smt. Usha Nakoti Vs. State and other. From a perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner is working on the sanctioned post of Shiksha Mitra in the aforesaid Primary school but she is not being paid the honorarium as admissible to Shiksha Mitra. Accordingly, it is directed that that till a regular teacher is appointed by the respondents, the petitioner be permitted to work on the post of Shiksha Mitra in the concerned Primary School and the petitioner be paid the honorarium 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