Anita Devi vs State Of J&K And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 286 j&K

     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT JAMMU

                                            Reserved on: 22.02.2022
                                            Pronounced on: 25.02.2022

                                                      SWP No. 1310/2015
                                                         IA No. 01/2015
                                                       CM No.3688/2020


Anita Devi                                                ...Petitioner(s)

             Through: - Ms. Aruna Thakur, Advocate.
      Vs.

State of J&K and others                                 ...Respondent(s)

             Through: - Mr. Achal Sharma, Advocate for R-5 & 6

CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE


                          JUDGMENT

1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash

the tentative select panel of Rehbar-e-Taleem prepared by the official

respondents for Middle School, Chander Bani and Middle School,

Hangh of village Akera Hangh with a further direction to the official

respondents to re-draw the panel in accordance with the advertisement

notice dated 16.07.2013 and Government Order dated 04.08.2010.

2. Vide advertisement notification dated 16.07.2013, respondent

No.3 invited applications from eligible candidates for filling up several

posts of Rehbar-e-Taleem lying vacant in different schools of district

Kishtwar. Notified vacancies included one post of Rehbar-e-Taleem for

Middle School, Chander Bani and one for Middle School, Hangh of

village Akera Hangh falling in education zone Drabshalla, district

Kishtwar. The petitioner, claiming to be eligible for the said post,

submitted her application form for consideration and engagement as

Rehbar-e-Taleem. It is claimed that respondent No.4 prepared the merit

panel of the eligible candidates and showed the name of the petitioner at

serial No.3. Grievance of the petitioner is that in terms of the orders

passed by the Secretary to the Government, Department of School

Education dated 04.08.2010 and Government Order No.635-Edu of

2010 dated 04.08.2010, the petitioner alone was entitled to be

considered and placed at serial No.1 amongst the eligible candidates.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the

official respondents have prepared the panel in violation of the

Government Orders aforesaid and have, thus, placed the petitioner at

serial No.3, whereas she was entitled to be placed at serial No.01.

4. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have opposed the maintainability of the

writ petition and have, in their reply affidavit, submitted that, though,

vide Government Oder No.919-Edu of 2018 dated 16.11.2018, the

Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme stands formally closed, yet the existing

Rehbar-e-Taleems already appointed under the scheme would continue

to be governed under the Rehbar-e-Taleem scheme, which was later on

closed. It is further submitted that the Chief Education Officer,

Kishtwar vide advertisement notification dated 16.07.2013 read with

extension notice dated 27.07.2013, invited applications from candidates

for various posts of Rehbar-e-Taleem in District Kishtwar, which, inter

alia, included one post of Rehbar-e-Taleem in Middle School, Chander

Bani and one post in Middle School, Hangh. It is submitted by the

respondents that both the schools i.e. Middle School, Chander Bani and

Middle School, Hangh fall in revenue village Akera Hangh and are not

pre-dominantly inhabited by SC and ST population and, therefore, the

panel of eligible candidates of the village on the basis of merit was

prepared and consequently, respondents recommended the name of

respondent No.5 for engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleem in Middle School,

Hangh and respondent No.6 in Middle School, Chander Bani. The

petitioner being inferior in merit was placed at serial No.3 of the panel

and, therefore, could not make it to the final select list, which was

approved by the Director, School Education, Jammu. It is submitted

that both respondent Nos. 5 and 6, after having been engaged as

Rehbar-e-Taleem, have now completed more than five years of service

and their case for regularization is pending before the official

respondents.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record, I am of the view that the petitioner has not been able to make

out any case against the selection and engagement of respondent Nos. 5

and 6 as Rehbar-e-Taleem in their respective schools.

6. There is no dispute that the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6

belong to revenue village Akera Hangh and, therefore, eligible to apply

for both the posts, one available in Middle School, Hangh and the other

in Middle School, Chander Bani. The petitioner also does not dispute

the fact that in terms of merit, both respondent Nos. 5 and 6 have better

merit than that of the petitioner. The contention of learned counsel for

the petitioner is that since village Akera Hangh is pre-dominantly

inhabited by SC and ST population and, therefore, the petitioner being a

candidate belonging to SC category alone was entitled to be considered.

7. There is inherent fallacy in the argument raised by the learned

counsel for the petitioner. What is provided by Government Order

No.635-Edu of 2010 dated 04.08.2010 is that for filling-up of regular

vacancies of teachers in socially and educationally backward areas and

in areas near the line of actual control identified under the J&K

Reservation Rules are required to be filled-up on the pattern of Rehbar-

e-Taleem scheme. The Government order further provides that where

the habitation/habitations is/are pre-dominantly inhabited by ST/SC

population, only the candidates belonging to these categories and

possessing the prescribed qualification alone shall be considered. There

is nothing on record placed by the petitioner to indicate that village

Akera Hangh is pre-dominantly inhabited by SC category and,

therefore, petitioner alone has a right of consideration to the exclusion

of respondent Nos. 5 and 6. The reply of the official respondents is

clear and categoric that population of village Akera Hangh is not pre-

dominantly inhabited by SC. The SC population constitutes only

36.89% of the total population and, therefore, the contention of the

petitioner that she alone or the candidates belonging to SC category

alone were entitled to be considered to the exclusion of other

candidates, cannot be accepted. It is also evident from the

advertisement notification in question. It nowhere refers to the filling-

up of the vacancies of regular teachers on the pattern of Rehbar-e-

Taleem in the areas pre-dominantly inhabited by SC. The advertisement

notice refers to filling-up of regular vacancies of teachers in socially

and educationally backward areas and in the areas near the actual line of

control identified under the J&K Reservation Rules.

8. Be that as it may, in the absence of any proof brought on record

by the petitioner to show that village Akera Hangh is pre-dominantly

inhabited by SC, contention of the petitioner that she along with other

candidates belonging to SC category should have been considered for

the posts of Rehbar-e-Taleem in question to the exclusion of private

respondents is totally misconceived and cannot be accepted.

9. For the foregoing reasons, I find no merit in the writ petition. The

same is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

JAMMU 25.02.2022 Vinod, PS Whether the order is speaking: Yes Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No