Parveiza Akhter vs Abdul Rashid War
2022 Latest Caselaw 1177 j&K

                                                                        Sr. No. 12

           HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                           AT JAMMU


                                               CPSW No. 231/2018

Parveiza Akhter                                        .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

                        Through: None

                  Vs

Abdul Rashid War,                                                ..... Respondent(s)
Director School Education Department and
others

                        Through: Mr. Suraj Singh, GA.

Coram:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
                                      ORDER

29.08.2022

1. Respondents/contemnors No. 1 and 2 i.e., Director School Education,

Jammu and Chief Education Officer, Ramban are present in compliance

to Court order dated 04.08.2022. Record has also been produced. Perusal

of the record reveals that the respondent/contemnor No. 3-Zonal

Education Officer, Gool has seemingly issued an Order No.

ZEO/G/19/894-95 dated 25.1.2019, whereunder it is stated that the claim

of the petitioner cannot be considered and stands rejected on the premise

that the R-e-T Scheme had been withdrawn by the Govt. vide

Administrative Council Decision dated 14.11.2018 read with Order dated

16.11.2018.

2. The record of the proceedings would reveal that the petitioner had earned

judgment/order on 07.07.2017 passed in SWP No. 1201/2017 whereunder

while disposing of the petition of the petitioner, respondents were directed

to finalize the tentative select list for the post of R-e-T at NPS Khatmat

Mohalla Ramgarh Tehsil Gool District Ramban as was published on

09.08.2014 in accordance with rules and regulations applicable provided

there is no legal impediment for the same and the select list has not

already been finalized.

3. Perusal of the record produced by the respondents, in particular, order of

consideration dated 21.01.2019 would reveal that the panel prepared by

the respondents in respect of the post of R-e-T in question had been

published as tentative select list dated 09.08.2014 and had been furnished

to Chief Education Officer Ramban for onwards submission to the

Director School Education, Jammu for necessary approval. It is not

evident from the record as to when the Chief Education Officer, Ramban

in compliance to the Court order forwarded the case of the petitioner to

the Director School Education, Jammu for approval. Perusal of the said

order does not as well demonstrate as to whether the

respondent/contemnor No. 1-Director School Education received the case

of the petitioner for necessary approval from the respondent/contemnor

No. 2-Chief Education Officer, Ramban or not and if received, what steps

had been taken thereof in compliance to the court order dated 07.07.2017.

4. Prima facie record reveals that the respondents/contemnors have slept

over the matter after receipt of the Court order dated 07.07.2017and have

not undertaken any exercise for compliance of the same. The

respondents/contemnors instead seem to have chosen to issue

consideration order dated 21.1.2019 after more than a year, rejecting the

claim of the petitioner on the premise that the Govt. has withdrawn the

R-e-T Scheme on 16.11.2018. Seemingly, the consideration order (supra)

has been issued by the respondents/contemnors only to come out of the

contempt proceedings. The record produced by the

respondents/contemnors does not per se reflect the action required to be

taken by the respondents/contemnors in compliance to the Court order

notwithstanding the closure of the Scheme. The stand taken by the

respondents/contemnors in the consideration order while rejecting the

claim of the petitioner thus is rejected. The failure of the

respondents/contemnors to comply with the Court order admittedly is writ

large on the face of the record besides being deliberate and intentional,

warranting framing of rule against the respondents/contemnors.

Accordingly, Rule is framed against the respondents/contemnors. Registry

is directed to frame 'Robkar' against the respondents/contemnors and list

the matter for consideration after two weeks. Respondents/contemnors

shall appear in person on the next date of hearing as well.

5. List again on 14.10.2022.

(Javed Iqbal Wani) Judge Jammu 29.08.2022 NARESH