COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) 780/2002 Smt. Shanti Pande …….Petitioner Versus State of Uttaranchal through Secretary, Department of Education, Dehradun and Others ……Respondents Sri D.S. Patni, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Smt. Bina Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. 6th May, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “(i) To issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 5 to consider the candidature of the Petitioner for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher by treating her at par with B.T.C. trained candidates. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as Assistant Teacher (Basic) by treating her to have been trained in the year 1994 when the Petitioner was exempted from the requirement of B.T.C. training in view of long services rendered as Primary Teacher in a recognized Institution. 2 (iii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 1 to hold a high level inquiry into the illegal appointments on the post of Assistant Teacher in Basic Schools from time to time by the concerned authorities of Basic Shiksha Parishad and to cancel illegal appointments of unqualified candidates and also to punish the Officers responsible for such illegal appointments. (iv) To issue any other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) To award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the Petitioner.” 2. Petitioner seeks her appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher by treating her at par with B.T.C. trained teachers. But the petitioner is not entitled to be appointed as such inasmuch as she does not fulfill the requirements prescribed for the same. Petitioner is not a B.T.C. trained. Petitioner has neither done B.T.C. regular course nor B.T.C. correspondence course. However, she will continue as untrained teacher and will get the salary of untrained teacher. 3. The writ petition being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) Prabodh