IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WPSS No. 928 of 2005 Dinesh Lal & Ors. …..Petitioners. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. ……..Respondents. None appears for the petitioners. Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned counsel for the respondents. 24th September, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has made following prayers: “i. Issue writ order, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to treat Siksha Visarat qualification from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Allahabad (Prayag) as equivalent to B.Ed and consider the candidature of the Petitioners for appointment as Special B.T.C. trained assistant Teacher in Primary School run by the Zila Siksha and Prasikshan Shasthan, Barkot District Uttarkashi. ii. issue a writ, order and direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the claim of Petitioners in light of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court judgment dated 17.11.1999 passed in Writ Petition No. 9000/1996 Smt. Nirmala Rani Vs. State of UP.. iii. issue any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. iv. To award the cost of the Petitioner.” 2. So far as first relief regarding treating the Shiksha Visharad equivalent to B.Ed is concerned, the same is a policy decision, which can be taken by the State Government and no Mandamus can be issued to the State Government to take policy decision. It is totally within the domain of the State Government either to take policy 2 decision or not. Considering the law and in public interest, relief no. 1 is refused. 3. So far as Relief No. 2 is concerned, the said judgment dated 17.11.1999 was passed in Writ Petition No. 9000/1996 Smt. Nirmala Rani Vs. State of UP., which was filed in the year, 1996. There is no statement of fact that equivalence granted upto 1996 has not been withdrawn by the State Government of U.P. and had the equivalence been granted by the State of Uttarakhand, the petitioner would not have made the prayer no. 1 for taking the policy decision treating the Shiksha Visharad equivalent to B.Ed., therefore, the Relief No. 2 is also refused. 4. So far as other relief are concerned, I don’t think it fit to grant the same in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. For the reasons recorded above, writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 24.9.2008 Rathour