IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 928 of 2010 Devendra Singh …….Petitioner. Versus District Education Officer, Tehri Tarhwal and others …Respondents. Sri K.N. Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioner. Sri Dinesh Gahtori, Standing Counsel present for the State. Sri B.S. Negi, Advocate present for respondent no. 3. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (oral) Heard Sri K.N. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri Dinesh Gahtori, Standing Counsel for the State and Sri B.S. Negi, Advocate for respondent no. 3. The petitioner is an assistant teacher in a grant-in- aid junior high school. The only contention of the petitioner is that his salary has not been released. The contention of the respondent is that the salary of the petitioner has not been released, as proper papers have not come from the Committee of Management of the school. Sri B.S. Negi, Advocate, who represents Committee of Management of the school, has filed his counter affidavit, in which he has made it clear that all the relevant papers have been sent to the District Education Officer, Tehri Garhwal. This being the position that all the relevant papers pertaining to the service of the petitioner have been sent to the District Education Officer, Tehri Garhwal, there is no plausible reason as to why the salary of the petitioner shall not be released, unless the department has some other reasons for withholding the salary. It is, therefore, directed that the salary of the petitioner shall be released forthwith and in no condition beyond fifteen days from the date a certified 2 copy of this order is produced before the District Education Officer, Tehri Garhwal. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 6.1.2011 Avneet