Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Sushma Jamwal vs State Of J&K & Ors on 29 February, 2024
Author: Sindhu Sharma
Bench: Sindhu Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
SWP No. 975/2013
Pronounced on :29.02.2024
Sushma Jamwal .... Petitioner(s)
Through:- Mr. Sudesh Sharma, Advocate
V/s
State of J&K & ors. .....Respondent(s)
Through:- Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
01. The petitioner seeks quashing of the selection/engagement of
respondent No. 5 as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher in Primary School
Dhanpur of Revenue Village Gurah Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnoor District
Jammu.
02. Chief Education Officer, Jammu issued an Advertisement
Notice No. CEOJ/SSA/2973-75 dated 29.04.2011, for engagement of
Rehbar-e-Taleem Teachers under SSA in Primary School on account of
vacancy on account of Primary School elevated out of EGS under SSA.
In Zone Jourian, one post each was advertised in Primary School,
Dhanpur, Primary School, Kothey Chiban & Primary School Marira in
revenue village Gurah Manhasan. The respondent No. 4 after receipt of
the application forms of all the candidates prepared the panel/list of
candidates to be engaged as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teachers in the aforesaid
village. The petitioner had applied for one of the posts of RET in
revenue village Gurah Manhasan and the merit panel was framed and
the petitioner was placed Serial No. 4 in the panel, however, respondent
No. 5 was placed at serial No. 2.
03. The panel was displayed and the objections were invited from
the general public regarding the tentative panel prepared by the official
respondents. The contention of the petitioner is that she submitted her
objections with regard to the candidature of respondent No. 5 figuring
at serial No. 2 of the said panel on the ground that she was married
outside the village and after her marriage, she shifted to village Kote-
Bhalwal, Tehsil Bhalwal District Jammu. The respondent no. 5 is
residing permanently with her in-laws and, as such, was not eligible for
engagement against the post of RET advertised for Revenue Village
Gurah, Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnoor.
04. It is submitted that after receipt of the objections from the
petitioner, respondent No. 2 directed respondent No. 3 to enquire into
the objections and after conducting enquiry, the matter was referred to
respondent No. 4 for investigation. A detailed report was submitted by
respondent No. 4, however, without considering the same, respondent
No. 5 was engaged as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher for Primary School,
Dhanpur of Revenue Village Gurah, Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnoor.
05. By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the
selection/engagement of respondent No. 5 on the ground that she has
been engaged in violation of Government Order No. 394-Edu of 2006
dated 28.07.2006 and was not eligible to be engaged as Rehbar-e-
Taleem Teacher for Primary School Dhanpur. The petitioner submits
that respondent No. 5 has shifted from village Gurah Manhasan, Tehsil
Akhnoor to village Kote-Bhalwal, Tehsil Bhalwal after her marriage on
28.11.2011 and is permanently residing there and as such, is ineligible
to be engaged/selected as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher in village Gurah
Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnoor .
06. The respondent No. 4 after conducting detailed enquiry
recommended the selection/engagement of the next meritorious
candidate i.e., the petitioner, however, respondent Nos. 2 & 3 have
ignored the said recommendation and entitlement of the petitioner for
the engagement of the aforesaid post.
07. In her objections, respondent No. 5 has submitted that though
the petitioner had also participated in the selection process for the post
of RET but she possessing qualification B.A/B.Ed. having superior
merit i.e., 51.45% than the petitioner, who secured 45.51% in
B.A/B.Ed., was recommended to be engaged as Rehbar-e-Taleem
Teacher for village Dhanpur, Tehsil Akhnoor. The panel was duly
prepared by the Village Education Committee and recommended by the
Zonal Education Officer, Jourian, wherein three candidates including
the petitioner were tentatively selected for the post but the petitioner
being lesser in merit could not be recommended against any of the post.
08. The objections filed by the petitioner against the tentative
panel were duly considered and verification was initiated. After the
completion of the verification, it was found that though the answering
respondent No. 5 was married but she had never shifted her place of
residence from village Gurah Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnoor to her
matrimonial house till date and is permanently and actually residing at
Gurah Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnor. This fact was duly verified by the
Tehsildar Akhnoor vide his report dated 06.10.2012 and not only this,
even the Chowkidaran/Chulla of the husband of answering respondent
namely Susheel Jamwal was also of village Gurah Manhasan, as such,
after verification and scrutiny of documents, it was proved that the
physical and actual residence of respondent No. 5 is at Gurah
Manhasan, Tehsil Akhnoor, therefore, the tentative select list was made
final and the respondents issued an order of engagement of respondent
No. 5 on 22.04.2013 pursuant to which, she joined her duties. The
petitioner despite having the knowledge of the engagement of
respondent No. 5 has filed this petition and the same is required to be
dismissed.
09. The official respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in their objections have
submitted that the merit panel for three posts of Rehbar-e-Taleem
Teachers was prepared and displayed for seven days seeking objections,
if any, from general public, however, no objection has been submitted
to ZEO Jourian and subsequently, the said panel was submitted to the
Chief Education Officer, Jammu vide respondent No.4‟s
communication dated 04.11.2011. When the panel was put before the
Selection Committee i.e., Director School Education, Jammu and
objections were again called from the candidates and the petitioner filed
objection that the candidate figuring at serial No. 2 of the merit list i.e.,
respondent No. 5 had been married outside the revenue village,
therefore, the petitioner was to be considered as she was next in merit.
A detailed enquiry in this regard was conducted regarding the objection
raised by the petitioner and it was reflected that respondent No. 5 was
unmarried at the time of submission of her application form for the post
of Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher and she had been married to another
village, however, as per the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Akhnoor and
report of the Tehsildar, it transpired that respondent No. 5 is residing in
the same village and in view of the residential proof submitted by the
Tehsildar, respondent No. 5 was engaged as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher.
10. Mr. Sudesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, has
placed reliance on a judgment of the Hon‟ble Division Bench of this
Court in case titled Sunita Rajput vs State & ors. reported as (2013) 2
JKJ 507 in which while considering the scheme of Rehbar-e-Taleem
Teachers, the Hon‟ble Division Bench had set aside the judgment
stating that the judgment in Sunita Rajput view and the fact taken that a
candidate though not actually residing in the village where the school
having R-e-T position vacant is located would still be eligible for such
position, in case she had roots in the village or some other connection
with the village is untenable in view of the fact that it offends letter and
spirit of Govt. Order No. 396-Edu of 2000 dated 28.04.2000 read with
Govt. Order No. 394-Edu of 2006, dated 28.07.2006.
11. The entire claim of the petitioner is that respondent No. 5 is
ineligible in view of the fact that she has married outside the village and
is not permanently residing in the village where she has been engaged,
therefore, her engagement is in contravention to Govt. Order No. 394-
Edu of 2006, dated 28.07.2006, which reads as under:-
"Government Order No. 394-Edu of 2006
Dated 28.07.2006"
Whereas the Hon'ble High Court of J&K in its
order dated 16.2.2006 passed on LPA(SW) No.215/2004 titled
Ranjit Sharma Vs. State and Ors. while deliberating on the
eligibility provisions contained in Government order No.396-Edu
of 2000 dated 28.4.2000 desired the harmonization of terms
"belong" and "local candidate" through a definition in a manner as
would stop generation of any litigation on the subject;
Whereas the matter has been examined in the context
of the letter and spirit of the scheme of Rehbar-e-Taleem as
envisaged in Government Order No.396-Edu of 2000 dated
28.4.2000 and contemporaneous records;
Whereas the conceptual framework of the scheme
makes it clear that the candidate to be considered for appointment
as "Rehbar-e-Taleem" should be actually residing at the time of
his/her appointment in the village in which the deficiency has been
assessed and therefore, any view to the contrary would not be in
conformity with the objectives and the concept of the scheme.
Now therefore, it is ordered that the following
Explanation shall add to clause (i) of the eligibility clause in the
Government order No.396-Edu of 2000 dated 28.04.2000:-
"Explanation: The word „belong‟ and "local candidate"
shall mean that the candidate to be appointed should be actually
residing at the time of appointment in the village where the
appointment is to be made"
By order of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir."
12. This explanation was added keeping in view the fact to
harmonize the term belongs and local candidate in terms of the
government Order No. 396-Edu of 2000 dated 28.04.2000. Thus, the
entire purport of the scheme is keeping in view the fact that the
candidate, who is engaged, should actually be residing at the time of
appointment in the village where the appointment is to be made. The
only ground, on which respondent No. 5‟s engagement could be
questioned, would only be if at the time of her appointment or
thereafter, she was not actually residing in the village where the
appointment is to be made.
13. The official respondents after considering the objections of the
petitioner have conducted an in-depth enquiry and had come to the
conclusion that respondent No. 5 had applied for the post at the time
when she was unmarried and even after marriage, she is actually
residing in the same village. The Tehsildar Akhnoor has also given
report to this extent.
14. The object of the ReT Scheme is that the candidate must be
actually residing in the village where the school is established. This
provides the right of consideration to the candidate, who is actually
residing in the village. The petitioner fulfills the objection of the
scheme as she belongs to and residing in the village and had applied the
post, before her marriage and continues to actually reside in the village
where the school is established.
15. This apart, respondent No. 5 has been engaged and is
discharging her duty since 22.04.2013 and for the last 10 years, not only
is working as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher but her services must have also
been regularized against the said post. The petitioner, despite the
knowledge of the same, has chosen not to question/assail her
regularization as General Line Teacher. There is no complaint by any of
the other respondents with regard to her service or the fact that she is
not actually residing in the village.
16. Though respondent No. 5 has placed on record the proof and
verification which has been duly done by the official respondents with
regard to her residence in the same village but that apart, just only on
the ground that she has married outside the village would not result in
her not being a resident of the village. The only requirement as per the
Govt. Order No. 394-Edu of 2006, dated 28.07.2006 is that she should
be actually and physically residing in the village at the time of her
appointment and this being duly proved by the authority.
17. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is no
merit in this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed along with
connected application(s), if any.
(Sindhu Sharma)
Judge
JAMMU
RAM MURTI/PS
29.02.2024
Whether the order is speaking : Yes
Whether the order is reportable : Yes
