Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ashok Kumar vs State Through Education Deptt.
2022 Latest Caselaw 1506 j&K

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1506 j&K
Judgement Date : 27 October, 2022

Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Ashok Kumar vs State Through Education Deptt. on 27 October, 2022
                                                                 Serial No. 33
                                                               Regular Cause List


      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU

                          LPASW No. 10/2016
                            IA No. 01/2016


Ashok Kumar
                                                           ... Appellant(s)
                              Through: -
                     Ms. Meenakshi Slathia, Advocate


                                    V/s
State through Education Deptt., and Ors.

                                                          ... Respondent(s)

Through: -

Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

CORAM:

Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, Judge (ORDER) 27.10.2022

1. The instant appeal is preferred against the Judgment of dismissal of

the writ petition by the learned Writ Court vide impugned Judgment dated

28.12.2015.

Brief facts of the case are summarized as under:-

a. That in terms of advertisement notice No. DIP/J-7537 dated

07.01.2010, Chief Education Officer, Doda had invited the

applications for the engagement of ReT teachers available in

upgraded Primary School, which include UPS Thawa falling in

Education Zone Ghat. One vacancy was to be filled up from amongst the candidates having Science background and the other

from amongst the candidates having Mathematics background.

b. Appellant having Science background had applied for one

vacancy and in the panel prepared, he figured at serial No. 4,

whereas one Mst. Zahida Parveen figured at serial No. 1. A

tentative select list of two candidates, one Mst. Zahida Perveen

(Medical stream) and one Sanjay Kumar Sharma (Math stream),

vis-a-vis Sanjay Kumar Sharma, there is no grievance projected.

c. As against the tentative selection of Mst. Zahida Perveen,

appellant filed a petition bearing SWP No. 2154/2010, projecting

therein that Mst. Zahida Perveen is not resident of the habitation

where the school is located, whereas two other candidates who

figured at serial Nos., 2 and 3 (Medical stream) were not

interested. During the pendency of the said petition, there was a

development, viz respondent No. 5, therein Mst. Zahida Perveen

had been appointed somewhere else. In view of this development,

with the consensus of the learned counsel for the parties, the

petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent

authorities therein to consider the case of the petitioner strictly in

terms of the rules governing the field and to take decision within

two months. The matter appears to have been pending for quite

long time. Finally, the respondent authorities therein decided to

re-advertise the said post as such, advertised vide Re-

Advertisement Notification No. CEO/D/RET/Legal/9658-59

dated 10.06.2014, as was issued from the office of Chief Education Officer, Doda. Aggrieved by the said re-advertisement

notice, the appellant has filed another petition bearing SWP No.

1713/2014, seeking its quashment with a further prayer to direct

respondents to issue appointment order in favour of the appellant

based on the select panel as was impugned in SWP No.

2154/2010.

d. During the pendency of the writ petition bearing SWP No.

1713/2014, one Sh. Sheetal Chander filed application for

impleadment as he had responded to the re-advertised notice,

therefore, claimed an interest based on which he stands impleaded

as party respondent No. 6.

e. In the reply filed by respondents 1 to 4, it has been specifically

pleaded that in pursuance to the direction issued in SWP No.

2154/2010 dated 11.12.2012, the case of the appellant was

considered. Appellant failed to establish his claim, as a result

whereof a speaking order was issued vide No. CEO/D/Legal/9647

dated 17.06.2014, wherein it was decided to re-advertise the posts.

As such, re-advertisement notice impugned was issued.

f. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the writ Court has

reserved the case for orders. Subsequent thereto, learned counsel

for the respondent No. 6, laid a motion praying therein that certain

important documents are required to be taken on records which

will help effectual adjudication of the matter. Same was not

opposed and permitted vide order dated 14.12.2015 passed in MP

No. 01/2015, as such, documents, i.e., (a) Photo-copy of order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the Chief Education Officer, Doda

while considering the case of the appellant in light of the

Judgment rendered in SWP No. 1254/2010.

g. In compliance to the Judgment dated 11.12.2012, rendered in

SWP No. 1254/2010, the respondent Chief Education Officer has

passed a detailed order dated 17.06.2014, thereafter as a follow up

re-advertisement notice has been issued on 18.06.2014, and

published on 23.06.2014. The appellant has challenged the re-

advertisement notice, but has not challenged the order dated

17.06.2014, nor had produced the copy of the said order along

with his writ petition.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the

appellant has not challenged the consideration order dated 17.06.2014,

whereby his claim was rejected. Learned counsel further submits that the

Government has closed the ReT scheme, therefore, the appellant cannot

challenge the writ Court order.

3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the records

and considered the matter.

4. Learned writ Court has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that

the appellant-petitioner having accepted the order passed by the Court in the

earlier writ petition bearing SWP No. 1254/2010, thereby directing the

respondents to consider the claim of the appellant-petitioner, which claim

on consideration was rejected by the respondents in terms of order dated

17.06.2014, which was not challenged, therefore, view taken by the writ

Court has no legal infirmity and deserves no interference.

5. In the above background, the instant appeal having no merit shall

stand dismissed along with connected CM(s).

6. Before parting with the file, we deem it appropriate to observe

that the dismissal of the instant LPA, shall not form an impediment for the

appellant to challenge the action of the respondents in terms whereof, the

ReT scheme has been closed, as other aggrieved individuals are stated to

have already challenged the closure of the scheme before Court of law

which is pending consideration.



(Vinod Chatterji Koul)                (Ali Mohammad Magrey)
                    Judge                           Chief Justice

JAMMU
27.10.2022
"Mohammad Yasin Dar"
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter