IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 877 of 2005 Pramod Kumar and another. … Petitioners. Versus Principal, District Education and Training Institute and others. … Respondents. Mr. Rajesh Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vijay Bhatt, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondents no. 1-4. WITH Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1428 of 2007 (Old WPMS No.1248 of 2005) Balbir Singh S/O Shri Gurdayal Singh. … Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and 2 others. … Respondents. Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the State-respondents. Date August 02, 2011. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Since the controversy involved in both these writ petitions is similar, therefore, for the sake of convenience, they are being disposed of by this common order. By means of writ petition bearing W.P.M.S. No. 877 of 2005, the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 13/14-7-2005 passed by respondent no.1, which has been annexed as Annexure No. 12 to the petition. The petitioners have further sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to treat the petitioners in the Science Group in the result of Special B.T.C. trainees and to allow them to join the Special B.T.C. training pursuant to advertisement dated 19-4-2005. By means of the writ petition bearing W.P.S.S. No. 1428 of 2007, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for Special B.T.C. treating the petitioner in Science Group. 2 During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the controversy involved in these writ petitions had been resolved by this Court in Writ Petition No. 768 (M/S) of 2005, Som Pal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and two others by order dated 25-7-2005. Learned counsel for the petitioners further urged that the facts of the present writ petitions are almost similar to the facts of the WPMS No. 768 of 2005 decided on 25-7-2005, therefore, these writ petitions may be disposed of in terms of the order passed in the said writ petition. Learned State counsel has fairly submitted that the controversy involved in these writ petitions is squarely covered by the order dated 25-7-2005 passed by this Court in WPMS No. 768 of 2005. In both the present writ petitions, interim orders were granted by this court on 17-8-2005 and 27-10-2005 respectively directing the respondent authorities to admit the petitioners provisionally for Special B.T.C. course treating them in Science Group, even if they were otherwise eligible. I have perused the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 768 (M/S) of 2005, Som Pal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and two others, wherein the petitioner Sompal has sought the relief to consider his candidature as Science Graduate for the Special B.T.C. course. In my view, the present writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition No. 768 (M/S) of 2005, Som Pal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and two others. Both the writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the order dated 25-7-2005 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 768 (M/S) of 2005, Som Pal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and two others. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners as Science Graduate for the Special B.T.C. training course as was directed by this Court in the said Writ Petition. Costs easy. (B.S.Verma, J.) RCP