HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR SWP No. 188/2016 Pronounced on: 09.05.2025 (i) Rehana Akhter, Aged 35 Years, D/o Ali Mohammad Mir, R/o Mahora, District Budgam, Kashmir …. Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. Azhar-Ul-Amin, Advocate V/s (i) State of J&K through Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. of J&K, Education Department, Civil Secretariat Srinagar/Jammu (ii) Director, School Education Kashmir, Srinagar (iii) Chief Education Officer, Budgam (iv) Zonal Education Officer, Budgam (v) Rubina Akhter, C/o Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher, Government Middle School Mahora, Budgam …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. Rekha Wangnoo, G.A Mr. G.A. Lone, Advocate for R-5 CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE JUDGMENT 01. The petitioner seeks quashing of consideration order No. DESK/Legal/216/08/116-19 dated 03.03.2015, passed by the Director, School Education, Srinagar. 02. The grievance of the petitioner is regarding selection and engagement of respondent No. 5 as 3rd Teacher in the Government Middle School Mahwara, Budgam vide order No. ZEOB/RT-SSA/04/2032-35 dated 12.01.2005. The selection and engagement of respondent No. 5 was challenged by the petitioner earlier by filing Writ Petition, i.e., SWP No. 1583/2008 before this Court, inter alia, on the grounds that her engagement SWP No. 188/2016 was made without issuance of any public notice and that she was not eligible in terms of qualification and place of residence. 03. It is submitted that at the time of filing of the writ petition, the engagement order of respondent No. 5 was not disclosed to all, as such, the petitioner approached this Court seeking a direction to obtain a copy of the said order. In terms of the Court directions, the copy of the engagement order was provided to the petitioner. The order of engagement of respondent No. 5 was challenged by the petition by filing another writ petition i.e., SWP No. 84/2010. 04. Both these writ petitions were considered and disposed of vide common order dated 09.10.2013. “This writ petition along with the connected IA(s) is disposed of and respondent No. 2 is directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. The parties will be permitted to file documents before respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 to consider and take decision in the matter after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner and the private respondent within eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is served.” 05. In compliance with the said order, the respondents considered the grievance of the petitioner and passed a consideration order dated 03.03.2015, rejecting the claim of the petitioner as being without any merit. 06. By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the consideration order dated 03.03.2015 and also seeks quashing of the impugned engagement order of respondent No. 5 dated 12.01.2005.A further direction is sought to the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner to the post of 3rd ReT Teacher in Government Middle School, Mahwara. 07. The contention of the petitioner is that the impugned consideration order has been passed without conducting any enquiry in terms of the SWP No. 188/2016 judgment and without any proper application of mind. The impugned order has been passed only with the intention to accommodate respondent No. 5. The respondents have erroneously arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner‟s claim does not hold any merit only to defeat the legitimate right and interest of the petitioner. 08. It is averred that the posts of 3rd Teacher were created and became available only after issuance of order dated 01.10.2003, whereby ten General Line Teachers from each Zone were required for smooth functions of SSA Units, therefore, the advertisement for such posts dated 09.07.2003, being prior to the creation of posts, casts a shadow of doubt on the selection process. This clearly reflects that the respondents had not issued any public notice for engagement of 3rd teacher, and had engaged respondent No. 5. The respondents engaged respondent No. 5 ignoring the fact that she was not eligible for the post of 3rd Teacher being a resident of Bhagat-i-Barzualla Srinagar whereas the school is located in District Budgam. 09. The respondents, it is submitted, not only failed to properly inquire into the fraudulent engagement of respondent No. 5 but also arbitrarily declared the petitioner ineligible on the ground of being only 10+2 qualified, without affording her an opportunity of hearing. 10. In their objections, respondents No. 1 to 4 have submitted that, in the year 2003, the Government issued order No. EDU/SPD/SSA/59/2003 dated 01.10.2003, whereunder ten General Line Teachers from each zone were required to be deputed for implementation of the SSA programme. These deputed teachers were designated as ZRPs (Zonal Resource Persons) and CRPs (Cluster Resource Persons), and they were required to monitor the implementation of the SSA Seheme in their respective zones. To compensate SWP No. 188/2016 for the resultant deficiency of the Staff in the schools, new teachers were to be engaged on the ReT pattern for teaching purposes. 11. It is further submitted by them that ten posts of ReT Teachers in Zone Budgam were advertised on 20.01.2004 with a minimum qualification of graduation for filling up these posts on ReT pattern. A total of 22 candidates applied, and a tentative selection list was published in the local daily newspaper on 21.10.2004 for public information and objections. Since there were no objections to the tentative select list, the selected candidates were engaged. The Respondent No. 5, Ms. Rubina Akhtar, was placed at Serial No. 7 in the merit list prepared by the Zonal Education Officer and was engaged as a ReT Teacher in the Government Middle School Mahwara, Budgam on 12.01.2005, on the basis of her academic qualification and merit. 12. In compliance with the order passed by this Court on 01.09.2009 in SWP No. 1583/2008, both the parties were called to the office to substantiate their claim. After considering their representations and the available record, the respondents held that the posts of ReT were advertised stand filled up on zonal merit basis. That as many as twenty two candidates from Zone Budgam had applied for engagement, the petitioner did not apply for consideration of the aforesaid post. The tentative selection list was issued in daily newspaper on 21.10.2004 and no objection against the candidature was received. The respondent No. 5 was, accordingly, selected as 3rd ReT teacher. The respondents further submit that respondent No. 5 had produced all the relevant documents to establish her claim as resident of Budgam. The petitioner, in fact, neither applied for the post nor possessed the necessary qualification at relevant time. SWP No. 188/2016 13. The respondent No. 5 has also filed her objections opposing the claim of the petitioner. It is submitted that the initial writ petition challenging her engagement order dated 12.01.2005 was filed more than four years after her appointment. It is further submitted that the petitioner did not respond to the advertisement notice dated 20.01.2004 as she was ineligible, since the graduation was the minimum prescribed qualification. 14. The respondent No. 5 was eligible being a graduate in Science, holding B. Sc. Degree and Master i.e., M. Sc. in Zoology with B.Ed qualification and was selected pursuant to the conclusion of selection process, on the basis of her merit. 15. The petitioner has challenged her selection on the ground that she is not a resident of District Budgam which is without any merit. It is submitted that her place of residence i.e., Baghat Barzulla, was within the territorial limits of District Budgam at the relevant time. The petitioner herself did not meet the essential eligibility requirement of being a graduate and was therefore rightly excluded from consideration. 16. The controversy raised in this petition as well as earlier petition relates only with regard to selection and appointment of respondent No. 5 as 3rd ReT Teacher in the Government Middle School Mahwara, Budgam Zone Budgam. The Government of J&K created 10,179 posts of 3rd Teacher for Primary Schools on the consolidated pay of Rs. 1500/- each per month on Rehbar-e-Taleem pattern, vide order No. 597 Edu of 2003 dated 02.06.2003. The Government order reads as under : “Government of Jammu & Kashmir, Civil Sectt. Education Department Subject:-Provision of 3rd Teacher in the Primary Schools. Cabinet Decision No. 92/6 dated 19.05.2003 SWP No. 188/2016 Government Order No. 597 Edu of 2003 Dated 02.06.2003 Sanction is hereby accorded to :- (i) Creation of 10,179 posts of (3rd) Teacher for Primary Schools, in the consolidated pay of Rs. 1500/- each per month (on the Rehbar-e-Taleem pattern). (ii) Creation of 10 posts of Teacher in the consolidated pay of Rs. 1500/- each per month (on the Rehbar-e-Taleem pattern) for ungradation of 100 Primary Schools to Middle Schools as approved under the Annual Work Plan (2002-03) of the SSA. (iii) Selection/engagement of candidates against the posts indicated at (i) and (ii) above, purely on merit basis, by a Committee comprising Director School Education (of the province),Chief Education Officer and Principal, DIET (of the respective District). By order of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir.” 17. The qualification for the selection of (3rd) teacher for Primary Schools was provided vide Government Order No. 1403 Edu of 2003 dated 22.0.8.2003, which reads as under:- “In continuation to Government Order No. 597 Edu of 2003 dated 02.08.2003, it is hereby ordered that the minimum qualification for the post of (3rd) Teacher created for teaching English in the Primary Schools will be Graduate degree. By order of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir.” 18. The Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA) also provided for formation of Zonal Resource Persons (ZRPs) and Cluster Resource Persons (CRPs) to monitoring implementation of the SSA Scheme. By appointment of ZRPs, number of vacancies were caused in different education zones including Zone Budgam. These vacancies caused by deputation of Teachers were decided to be filled up by engagement of Teachers on ReT pattern. The District Budgam comprises of twelve zones and ten posts of teachers became available in zone Budgam to be filled up on ReT pattern for engagement as 3rd Teacher. 19. Ten General Line Teachers from each zone were required to be deputed for implementation of the SSA programme. These teachers were SWP No. 188/2016 designated as ZRPs (Zonal Resource Persons) and CRPs (Cluster Resource Persons), and they were required to monitor the implementation of the SSA Scheme in their respective zones. The aforesaid Government Order also provided that the Schools from where the teachers are deputed and assigned the job of ZRPs and CRPs shall be provided services of a newly recruited teacher, whose engagement shall be made to overcome the deficiency of the Staff in the schools. In the year 2003, Ten General line teachers from each zone were required to be deputed and attached for proper implementation of the SSA programme. 20. The petitioner is aggrieved of the fact that she was precluded from consideration for engagement to the post of Teacher on ReT pattern in Budgam as the same were never advertised and, as such, she was unable to apply and be considered for the post. 21. Per contra, the respondents claim that these posts were duly advertised and pursuant to the advertisement, twenty two candidates from the aforementioned zone applied for engagement. 22. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondents had never advertised the post of (3rd) Teacher, as such, she was precluded from applying to the said post and this was done only to accommodate and appoint respondent No. 5 to the said post. In support of her contention, the petitioner submits that in the consideration order dated 03.03.2015, the respondents have stated that these posts were advertised on 20.01.2004 and subsequently, in the same order, in the last one paragraph, it is stated that 3rd ReT post was advertised on 08.07.2003 which clearly reflects their efforts to conceal the fact that the posts were never advertised. SWP No. 188/2016 23. The official respondents in their objections filed in SWP No. 1583/2008 have stated that the Advertisement Notice was issued on 09.07.2003 and the tentative panel of 13 candidates was prepared pursuant to the said Advertisement Notice but in the objections filed to this writ petition, the official respondents now have submitted that the Advertisement Notice was issued on 20.01.2004. Similar stand has also been taken by the private respondent, who in the earlier writ petition has stated that the Advertisement Notice was issued on 08.07.2003 and in this petition has relied on Advertisement Notice dated 20.01.2004. 24. The respondents have placed on record the copy of the Advertisement Notice No. DIPK-1843 dated 08.07.2003 issued by the Directorate of School Education, Kashmir which reads as under: “Government of Jammu & Kashmir Directorate of School Education Kashmir NOTICE In order to provide 3rd Teacher to the needy Primary Schools of School Education Department Kashmir, eligible candidates are directed to submit applications on plain paper to the Zonal Education Officer concerned to be accompanied by the following certificates latest by 19.07.2003. 01. Qualification Certificate 02. Date of Birth Certificate 03. Permanent Resident Certificate 04. Certificate of present residence to be issued by the Tehsildar concerned.” 25. The Advertisement Notice dated 17.01.2004 which was advertised in newspaper “Daily Aftab” on January 20, 2004 is also on record which has been issued by the Chief Education Officer, Budgam. This notification reveals that “the date for receipt of applications for engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleems in the below mentioned newly constructed schools as advertised by the respective Zonal Education Officers is extended upto 24th of January, 2004”. SWP No. 188/2016 26. The only other submission of the petitioner is that these posts were never advertised but the record reveals copy of advertisement dated 08.07.2003, issued by the Director School Education, Kashmir. A copy of the newspaper „Daily Alsafa‟ dated 21.10.2004 is also on record in which the list of candidates proposed for engagement as ReT in the Schools sanctions under CRPs and ZRPs 3rd Teachers in Education in District Budgam was published and respondent No. 5 is figuring at Sr. No. 7 of the list of the candidates. This apart, the application of respondent No. 5 is also on record and almost 22 candidates had applied pursuant to the Advertisement Notice and hence the claim of the petitioner after more than four years of the engagement of respondent No. 5 is without any merit. 27. In response to the advertisement notice, as many as twenty-two candidates had applied, and the office of the Chief Education Officer, Budgam published a list of candidates on 21.10.2004 for engagement as ReT teachers in newly constructed primary schools sanctioned under SSA, against vacancies under CRC/ZRC, 3rd Teacher posts, and pending Education Volunteer positions in District Budgam, Kashmir. 28. The petitioner submits that the respondents have given two dates in their order of consideration. They have said that the posts advertised on 20.01.2004 and subsequently, in the last paragraph, they say that the petitioner was not eligible against 3rd Ret post advertised on 08.07.2003 which reflects that there is some concealment of facts by the respondents. 29. In the objections filed by the respondents, they have said that these posts were advertised on 20.01.2004, however, careful perusal of the notice reveals that notice of 17.01.2004 which was published on 20.01.2004 is with regard to recruitment for engagement of ReT teachers in continuation to the SWP No. 188/2016 already advertised posts. Thus, the fact that the posts were advertised is writ large on the face of record. Since the 1st notification was issued on 09.07.2003, pursuant to which, as many as twenty two candidates had applied including the petitioner which was duly considered and respondent No. 5 was selected on the basis of her merit.. 30. The next contention of the petitioner is that respondent No. 5 was ineligible on the basis of fact that she is resident of the village which does not fall in District Budgam. At the time of selection, answering respondent was residing in Education Zone Budgam at Barzulla which had become a part of Zone Srinagar only after reorganization of the Districts in Jammu & Kashmir held in 2007-2008. The petitioner had filed writ petition in 2016 almost four years of selection of respondent No. 5. This apart, inadvertent error in not explaining the exact date of advertisement would not come in the way of respondent No. 5, who was engaged as ReT teacher in the year 2012 and has continued on the said post for the last more than 13 years. 31. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there is no merit in this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Sindhu Sharma) Judge Jammu: 09.05.2025 Michal Sharma/PS Whether approved for reporting : Yes/No