IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 423 of 2010 (S/S) Furquan Ahmad and two others. …… Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Education, Dehradun and others. … Respondents. Mr. M.C.Pant, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Navneesh Negi, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondents. Date July 15, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Restoration Application No. 522 of 2010) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. This writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 9-6-2010. The applicant-petitioners have prayed for recalling the dismissal order and to decide the writ petition on merits. Grounds shown in the affidavit are sufficient to recall the dismissal order. The restoration application is allowed. The order dated 9-6-2010 is hereby recalled. The writ petition is restored to its original number. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to absorb and appoint the petitioners on the post of Shiksha Mitra in 2 District Dehradun and give them honorarium as per G.O. dated 28- 6-2006 and subsequent Government Orders. The petitioners claim to have been appointed as Shiksha Anudeshak/Shiksha Acharya in the Education Guarantee Centre concerned by the Village Education Committee. They also claim that these Education Guarantee Centres have been upgraded to Primary School. They also claim that they possess requisite qualification for being appointed as Shiksha Mitra as per Government Order dated 28-6-2006 and 15-12-2006 and they have already undergone training at District Institute of Education and Training Dehradun in the year 2006 and 2007. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents are not appointing them as Shiksha Mitra as per Government Orders dated 28-6-2006 and 15-12-2006 rather applications are being invited by the respondents from other candidates for the post of Shiksha Mitra. In the course of arguments, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State has submitted that similar controversy as involved in the present writ petition had arisen in Writ Petition No. 41 of 2010(S/S), Bala Datt Sharma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others and the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 2-6-2010 passed by this Court. Learned counsel for the State has urged that this petition may be dismissed in terms of the order dated 2-6-2010. I have perused the order dated 2-6-2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 41 of 2010(S/S), Bala Datt Sharma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others and it has been held by the learned Single Judge of this Court that once a school has been upgraded as a primary school, teachers are required to be appointed under the provisions of the Act. I am of the view that the controversy 3 involved in the present writ petition is almost identical and the same stood resolved by the order dated 2-6-2010. The writ petition is dismissed in terms of the order dated 2-6-2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 41 of 2010(S/S), Bala Datt Sharma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. However, it is made clear that in the event the petitioners had worked either as Shiksha Anudeshak or as a Shiksha Mitra after up- gradation of the concerned Education Guarantee Centre to a Government Primary School, they would be entitled to the honorarium of Shiksha Mitra as per Government Order dated 15th May 2006 as modified by subsequent Government Orders. ( B.S.Verma, J. ) RCP