made clear that she could be replaced by a regular teacher. When the matter came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court on 28th May, 2010, learned counsel for Smt. Yashima Kumari Rana withdrew the writ petition without prejudice to his liberty to file a fresh petition. Thereafter, Smt. Yashima Kumari Rana filed another petition being CWP No. 2875 of 2010 and this was listed before a Division Bench of this Court on 02.06.2010. Though, in the petition a reference to the earlier petition was made but true facts were not set out. In the meantime, the petitioner, Smt. Minakshi Kapoor, was transferred to GSSS Gagal vide order dated 25th June, 2009. Obviously, in view of the clear cut orders passed by this Court in the earlier writ petition filed by Smt. Yashima Kumari Rana, she could be replaced by the regular teacher appointed in her place. She did not bring this fact to the notice of the Court when she withdrew the petition and in the subsequent petition, she did not even inform the Court that, in fact, her earlier petition was directed against the report of the Inquiry Committee, wherein her services had been terminated. In this second petition, she tried to portray that she was a PTA teacher being replaced by a regular teacher. In these circumstances, this Court passed a direction that the petitioner may be adjusted at some other post, if available.
