Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Mohammad Yousuf Dar Age 19 Years S/O ... vs State Of J&K Through Its Commr/Secy ... on 4 July, 2024
Author: Vinod Chatterji Koul
Bench: Vinod Chatterji Koul
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
...
SWP no.2112/2011
c/w SWP no.2378/2018
Pronounced on: 04.07.2024
SWP no.211/2011
Mohammad Yousuf Dar Age 19 years S/o Ghulam Mustafa Dar R/o Nawab
Kha Chanibal, Tehsil Pattan District Baramulla
.......Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr H. Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate
Versus
1. State of J&K through its Commr/Secy Education Deptt, Civil Sectt Sgr/Jmu
2. Director, Education, Sgr
3. Dy. Director, Education Deptt Sgr
4. Chief Education Officer, Baramulla
5. Dy. Commr. Baramulla
6. Zonal Education Officer, Singpora, Pattan, Baramulla
7. University of Kashmir, Hazratbal Srinagar through its Examination
..........Official Respondents
8. Gulshan Akhter W/o Mukhtar Ahmad D/o Aftab Ahmad Dar R/o Nawab Kha
Chanabal, Tehsil Pattan District Baramulla
9. Nazir Ahmad Dar S/o Gh. Mohammad Dar R/o Nawab Kha Chanabal Tehsil
Pattan District Baramulla
......Respondent(s)
Through: Mr M.A.Qayoom, Advocate
Mr Mubashir Malik, Dy.AG
Mr Zahid Qadir Noor, GA
Mr T.H. Khawaja, Advocate
SWP no.2378/2018
Nazir Ahmad Dar aged 37 years S/o Ghulam Ahmad Dar R/o Nawab Khah
Chanbal Zone singhpora Patta Kashmir
.........Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr M.A.Qayoom, Advocate
Versus
1. State of J&K through its Commr/Secy Education Deptt, Civil Sectt Sgr
2. Director, Education, Kashmir Sgr
3. Chief Education Officer, Baramulla
4. Zonal Education Officer, Singpora, Pattan, Baramulla
Page 1
SWP no.2112/2011
c/w SWP no.2378/2018
5. University of Kashmir through Controller Examination University of Kashmir,
Hazratbal, Srinagar
6. Mohammad Yousuf Dar S/o Ghulam Mustafa Dar R/o Nawab Khah Chanabal,
Tehsil Pattan Baramulla
..............Respondent(s)
Through: Mr Mubashir Malik, Dy.AG
Mr Zahid Qadir Noor, GA
Mr T.H. Khawaja, Advocate
Mr H. Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE
JUDGEMENT
1. Quashment of engagement of private respondents 8&9 made vide Order no.ZEO/ReT/622-25/S dated 26th July 2011 and no.ZEO/SSA/ ReT / 629-29/S dated 126th July 2011, is sought. A direction to respondents to appoint petitioner as ReT upon quashment of engagement of private respondents in Primary School, Nawab Kha Tehsil Pattan District Baramulla, is also sought.
2. Briefly put, the case set up by Mohammad Yousuf Dar, Petitioner, is that he possesses 10+2 qualification. Respondent no.6 issued advertisement notice inviting applications for engagement of two Rehbar-e-Taleems (ReTs) from inhabitants of village Nawab Kha, Chanabal, which was published in a newspaper, Kashmir Uzma, on 1 st November 2010. Petitioner also responded thereto. Respondents prepared a Panel, which contained names of private respondents as well. Aggrieved thereof, petitioner challenged it in a writ petition (SWP no.606/2011), which he, however, subsequently withdrew with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. Another writ petition, being SWP no.1676/2011 was filed. However, in the meantime, engagement orders were issued in favour of private respondents, due to which Page 2 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 abovementioned writ petition became infructuous, so the same was withdrawn on 10th August 2011.
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by private respondents 8&9, in which they state that petitioner is only 10+2 by his qualification and by no stretch of imagination he can challenge their engagement. They also state that no annexure with petition demonstrates that at the time of cut off date of receipt of application, petitioner was Graduate and has obtained, but certificate dated 12th March 2011 relied upon by petitioner is provisional certificate issued much after cut off date with no supported valid degree for any marks card. Petitioner has completed only 10+2 level and he cannot be compared with respondents over much meritorious as being graduate inasmuch as petitioner was not having valid degree at the time of cut off date. It is also stated by respondents that it is incorrect that respondent no.9 has not valid certificate at the time of submission of forms and there is no such remarks on the marks card of respondent no.9. The qualification and marks card submitted by respondent no.9 came to be scrutinized by official respondents vide letter no.ZEO/S/73/25-2-2011 with the Controller University of Kashmir and while enquiring the matter, verification of results of respondent no.9 came to be verified by University Authorities vide letter dated 10th January 2011 and 1st March 2011 and have in unequivocal terms verified that respondent no.9 to be passed and on the same basis empanelment of respondent no.9 has been done and proceeded with.
4. Reply affidavit has been filed by official respondents through Zonal Education Officer, Singhpora, Pattan, in which they state that Page 3 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 candidate, namely, Mtr. Gulshan Akhter, who stands at serial no.1 (b) in the List of candidates produced her PRC and Nikah Nama (Marriage Deed) in the office of respondent-Zonal Education Officer, Singhpora, Pattan, as a proof for her residence which shows that she resides at Nawasbkah and respondent-ZEO ascertained and verified it personally. The candidate, Mohammad Yousuf Dar, who stands at serial no.1 (d) in the List filed objections against Mr. Nazir Ahmed Dar, who is at serial no.1 (a) in the List, wherein he has stated that Nazir Ahmed Dar's Degree certificate is not valid for appointment because he has not passed the optional subject, Environment Science, in the 2nd Year of the Three-Year Degree course. The claim seems to be false as the marks sheet submitted by Mr. Nazir Ahmed Dar with his application does not show that he has failed in the subject of Environment Science in the 2nd year of Degree course. In order to clear the doubt, respondent-ZEO wrote to the Controller of Examinations, Kashmir University, vide no.ZEO/S/577 wherein respondent-ZEO asked him that the marks sheet mentions that mere possession of marks sheet does not in itself confer any right or privilege independent of proper qualification certificate which will be issued in due course of time, and that the degree certificate should confirm validity of the degree. The concerned authority was requested to provide the validity certificate or the degree certificate of the candidate, Nazir Ahmed Dar, who had applied for ReT, so that they would proceed in the process of decision for his appointment. The University issued a provisional certificate and stated the proper Degree Certificate will be issued in due course of time. The certificate Page 4 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 shows that Mr. Nazir Ahmad Dar has passed his B.A. Three Year Degree Graduation course and he is, thus, entitled for appointment as ReT. The candidate, Mohammad Yousuf Dar, who is at serial no.1(d) in the above list has passed 10+2 only and beyond that he does not possess any further qualification and as per SSA norms and status, he is not eligible for engagement. After thorough screening of the candidates, who submitted application for two posts of ReTs, respondent-ZEO submitted the panels of meritorious candidates to Chief Education Officer, Baramulla, vide no.ZEO/S/693 dated 12 th March 2011, for necessary action who published the same in daily newspaper Kashmir Uzma on 15th March 2011, seeking objections. In response, objections were filed by one Nissar Hussain Dar ( who had been earlier petitioner no.1) in the office of respondent-ZEO, but he withdrew from list of selection of ReTs for SSA P/S Nawabkah. Petitioner no.2, Mohammad Yousuf Dar, also filed objections but his objections, being not genuine because at the time of advertisement of posts and at the time he submitted his application for post, he possessed qualification of 10+2 only while as selected candidates in the panel possess higher qualification. The panel was approved by respondents 2&4 and, accordingly, ReTs were engaged.
5. Rejoinder has been filed by petitioner, Mohammad Yousuf Dar. He would contend that advertisement notice no.ZE/S/479-81 dated 30th October 2020 provided eligibility for engaging ReT as 10+2 or above. Applications were to be submitted within a period of ten days from the date of publication of notice, which was published in a Newspaper "Kashmir Uzma" on 1st November 2010, therefore, cut off date for Page 5 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 submitting applications was 10th November 2010. The prescribed qualification as well as higher qualification on which appointment is sought has to be acquired by an applicant prior to cut off date. Respondent no.9 has been engaged on the basis of his B.A. Degree, which he claimed to have acquired prior to cut off date. Respondent no.9 has failed in Environmental Science Paper in 2 nd year and the same is evident from the Result Gazette dated 31st December 2009. Respondent no.9 passed his Environmental Science Paper 2nd Year in January 2011, i.e., two months after cut off date. This fact is evident from inter se communication between respondents 2&7 and information provided by respondent no.7 in reply to application filed by petitioner under Right to Information Act (RTI). In reply to application of petitioner under RTI, respondent no.7 stated that the course of Environmental Studies had been made an additional compulsory course in 2nd year vide Notification no.F(Intro-En- Studies) ACAD/KU/04 dated 28th April 2014. Besides, the reply filed by respondent no.7 to instant writ petition makes it clear that according to the decision of Standing Committee of academic council of respondent-University, the degree (B.A.) shall be treated as complete after the candidate has passed Environmental Studies module course and the degree shall be reckoned from the date of passing of said module course. It is clear that respondent no.9 did not possess B. A. Degree at the time of submission of application and, therefore, comparative merit of petitioner and respondent no.9 was to be prepared on the basis of merit obtained in 10+2. It is also stated that petitioner had secured 543 marks out of 750, i.e., 72% in 10+2, Page 6 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 whereas respondent no.9 had secured 259 marks out of 600, i.e., 43% in his 10+2. Petitioner also states that he is more meritorious than respondent no.9 had every right to be engaged as ReT. SWP no.2378/2018
6. This writ petition has been filed by Nazir Ahmad Dar, who is respondent no.9 in SWP no.2112/2011. Mohammad Yousuf Dar, who is petitioner in SWP no.2112/2011 is respondent no.6 herein.
7. The case set up by petitioner is that in terms of advertisement notice dated 30th October 2010, issued by Zonal Education Officer, Baramulla - respondent no.4, inviting applications on plain paper for engaging two ReTs for the new opening Primary School at Nawab Khah for the said habitation under SSA having qualification of 10+2 or above on the basis of habitation as per Government Order no.288- Edu of 2009 dated 8th April 2009. Applications were to be submitted within ten days from the date of publication of notice with relevant certificates. In response, petitioner, Nazir Ahmad Dar, responded. Tentative Selection List was issued by Chief Education Officer, Baramulla - respondent no.3 herein, in which petitioner and one Gulshan Akhter were shown selected for engagement as ReT. It was mentioned in the said provisional select list that any person aggrieved thereof might represent in writing with documentary evidence within seven days from the date of publication of notification. A writ petition, being SWP no.606/2011 was filed by writ petitioners of SWP no.2112/2011 for quashing select list and their empanelment instead of petitioner herein and aforesaid Gulshan Akhter. In the said writ Page 7 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 petition, an order dated 29th March 2011 was passed by this Court directing official respondents to consider objections of aforesaid writ petitioners. It is stated that respondent no.4 considered the matter and vide letter no.ZEO/SSA/RT/2011/524-25 dated 28th June 2011 informed writ petitioners of SWP no.606/2011 that posts were advertised through Daily Kashmir Uzma and four candidates including them applied and before preparing merit list, Nissar Hussain Dar, writ petitioner no.1 surrendered his claim against the post by filing an application supported by an affidavit and that after examining merit list of remaining three candidates, it was found that petitioner no.2, Mohammad Yousuf Dar, was far behind in the merit, hence he did not qualify for engagement as ReT in Primary School Nawab Khah and they were accordingly informed that their claim has been rejected. Thereafter respondents finalized the selection and in terms of Order no.ZEO/SSA/RET/629-29/S dated 26th July 2011 engaged petitioner (Nazir Ahmad Dar) as ReT in Primary School Nawab Khah. Upon his engagement, SWP no.606/2011 was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one. It is being also stated that earlier another writ petition, being SWP no.1676/2011 was also dismissed on 10th August 2011 with liberty to challenge engagement order of petitioner. SWP no.2112/2011 was filed seeking quashing of engagement of petitioner and Gulshan Akhter. The said writ petition is pending. It is being also averred that petitioner has completed more than seven years' service as ReT and is waiting for his regularization as General Line Teacher. However, a show cause notice bearing no.DSEK/IMW/Bla/ 2015/466-67 dated 2nd March 2016 against Page 8 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 petitioner came to be issued by respondent no.2, which is said to have been replied by petitioner. However, respondent no.2 in terms of order no.1238-DSEK of 2018 dated 26th September 2018 has directed that appointment of petitioner as ReT in Primary School Nawab Khah Chainbal Zone shall be treated as cancelled ab initio. Aggrieved thereof petitioner has come up with instant writ petition. He prays that impugned order dated 26th September 2018 may be quashed and respondents may be directed to allow him to continue to work as ReT in Primary School Nawab Khah and also regularize him as General Line Teacher on the basis of his having completed more than seven years' service as ReT.
8. Reply/objections have been filed by official respondents. They state that petitioner had been engaged on the basis of him possessing higher qualification as he had submitted B.A. 3rd Year Marks Certificate at the time of selection process. They also state that one aspiring candidate, namely, Mohammad Yousuf Dar, who had also participated in selection process, filed a complaint that petitioner had not completed B.A. Degree on the cut off date stipulated in advertisement notification as he had not passed Environmental Science Paper of B.A.2nd Year on the cut off date. RTI Application was also filed before University of Kashmir for providing information about B.A. Degre of petitioner. By communication dated 4 th July 2013, report bearing No.F(NAD inf EUSE) Regd/KU 2013/475 dated 3rd July 2013 provided by the Assistant Registrar (Registration) wherein it was mentioned that petitioner has passed Environmental Science Paper of B.A. 2nd Year in January 2011, i.e., much after cut Page 9 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 off date fixed in Advertisement Notice. The matter was taken up with University of Kashmir vide letter dated 28th November 2015. In response, University of Kashmir vide letter No. F(Result-Verf) Tab/KU/2015 dated 8th December 2015 informed that passing of Environmental Science Subject is must for completing the Graduation and without passing said subject the degree certificate cannot be issued. In order to comply with principles of natural justice, a notice was issued to petitioner vide no.DSEK/IMW/ Bla/2015/391-93 dated 27th April 2016 to show cause as to why his services shall not be terminated. In response, petitioner submitted that passing of Environmental Science Subject was not compulsory for completion of Graduation. According to respondents, the response of petitioner was not justifiable and appointment of petitioner was cancelled vide impugned order dated 26th September 2018 and that there was no occasion to conduct any further inquiry into the matter except providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to petitioner.
9. I have heard learned counsel for parties and considered the matter.
10.Advertisement Notice, issued by Zonal Education Officer, Singhpora, Pattan and published in a newspaper, invited applications on plain paper for engagement of two ReTs in the new opening Primary School at Nawa Khah under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) having qualification of 10+2 or above the monthly honorarium of Rs.1500/- per month on the basis of habitation as per Government Order no.288- Edu of 2009 dated 8th April 2009. After receipt of applications by the Zonal Education Officer, a Panel of candidates on the basis of relative academic merit in the concerned Revenue Village/Ward/Habitation Page 10 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 had emerged as the prospective candidates for engagement as ReT. In the Panel two candidates, namely, Gulshan Akhter W/o Mukhtar Ahmad Dar and Nazir Ahmad Dar S/o Gh Ahmad Dar (private respondents 8&9) were shown as empaneled for engagement in Primary School Nawab Khah, on the habitation basis.
11.Private Respondents' selection was challenged by Nissar Hussain Dar, and Mohammad Yousuf Dar - petitioner herein, on the ground that private respondents had fake certificates to their credit in a writ petition, being SWP no.1676/2011. When it was brought to the notice of this Court that engagement orders had been issued in favour of private respondents and as a result of which writ petition had become infructuous, writ petitioners withdrew that writ petition with liberty. Instant writ petition, viz. SWP no.2112/2011 was filed by two persons, namely, Nissar Hussain Dar and Mohammad Yousuf Dar. However, subsequently Nissar Hussain Dar withdrew his writ petition to his extent only and petitioner no.2, namely, Mohammad Yousuf Dar, has continued to pursue it.
12.The grounds of challenge by petitioner in SWP no.2112/2011 vis-à- vis private respondents' engagement are that prescribed qualification as well as higher qualification on which appointment is being sought has to be acquired by a candidate prior to cut-off date but respondent no.9, Nazir Ahmad Dar, has been engaged on the basis of his B.A. Degree, which he did not possess on the cut-off date inasmuch as respondent no.9 passed his Environmental Science paper of 2nd year in January 2011, i.e., two months after cut-off date and that this fact is evident from inter se communications of official respondents 2&7;
Page 11 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 that Environmental Science paper has been made compulsory course in 2nd year vide Notification no.F(Intro-En-Studies)ACAD/KU/04 dated 28th April 2014; that the degree (B.A.) shall be treated as complete after a candidate passes Environmental Studies module course and the degree shall be reckoned from the date of passing of said module.
13.To controvert contentions of petitioner in SWP no.211/2011, it is vehement submission of respondent no.9 (petitioner in SWP no.2378/2018), namely, Nazir Ahmad Dar, that he has passed B.A. Final Year in Session November-December 2009, which is evident from Bachelor of Arts Degree Certificate issued by University of Kashmir, in which it is in unambiguous terms certified that petitioner has passed the said degree course examination as a regular candidate through Government Degree College, Bemina, in the year 2009 Session Nov-Dec. under Roll No.54604 and was placed in the Third Division. This submission has substance.
It is also stated by him that it is as a consequence of directions of the Supreme Court that Kashmir University vide Notification dated 28th April 2004, has introduced six months' module course for Environmental Studies at Under Graduate Level, which shall be as an additional compulsory course in the second year.
Attention of this Court has also been invited by petitioner (nazir Ahmad Dar) to the stand of the University of Kashmir, taken by it before this Court in a case (SWP no.1794/2011) titled as Suhail ur Rehman v. State of J&K and others, in which it is stated and maintained that six months module course for Environmental Studies Page 12 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 at Undergraduate Level in all affiliated colleges was introduced in the year 2004 in pursuance of the directions of the Supreme Court and that marks certificate of 3rd year class in favour of such of the students as have failed in Environment Studies subject/paper, has to be issued, but the result position of said subject has to be mentioned in 3 rd Year Marks Certificate with the caption compulsory Environmental Science of 3rd Year passed/failed and the Degree of candidates shall be reckoned from the date the result of 3rd year class is/was declared and that it is only the degree certificate of such candidates which shall not be issued unless they pass the said module/subject.
It is next stated that respondent no.9, after passing B.A. 3rd Year and after issuance of marks card on 5th February 2010, had responded to advertisement notice and got selected/appointed as ReT. He, therefore, is continuously working right from the date of his engagement as ReT, viz. 26th July 2011, and resultantly is entitled to be regularized, is the prayer made by respondent no.9 (petitioner in SWP no.2378/2018).
14. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the case set up by both the parties in their respective pleadings.
Nazir Ahmad Dar - respondent no.9 in SWP no.211/2011 (petitioner in SWP no.2378/2018) is working and discharging his duties as ReT since 26th July 2011. He has, thus, as on date completed, almost, 13 years in serving the department, which has accrued a right of equity in him to continue till he is regularized. Law in this regard has been settled by the Supreme Court in Roshni Devi, Shravan Kumar etc. v. State of Haryana, 1998 (8) SCC 59, by holding that Page 13 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 even if there is some minor irregularity in selection of a candidate and if such a candidate has put in a number of years of service, it may not be appropriate to disturb his appointment.
15.Attention of this Court has also been invited to a similar case, viz. LPASW no.174/2018, titled as Shazia Bashir v. Tanveera Akhter and others, in which a judgement has been rendered by a Division Bench of this Couret on 11th August 2021, by observing and holding as under:
"22) Lastly and importantly, the learned Writ Court has in a casual and cursory manner refused to attach any significance or importance to the fact that the appellant has been working firstly as an Education Volunteer and thereafter as a Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher and General Line teacher right from 2004 and discarded her case even on the grounds of equity.
23) The Supreme Court in Miss Shainda Hassan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. AIR 1990 SC 1381, which was a case, where the petitioner was appointed as a Principal in a Girls College though she had not the requisite experience in terms of the advertisement notice, allowed her to continue to work as Principal keeping in view the fact that she had served the institution for over 16 years. The Court held that it would be unjust to make her leave the post.
24) In Dr. (Mrs.) Meera Messey v. Dr. S. R. Mehrota and Ors. AIR 1998 SC 1153, the Supreme Court in a case where Himachal Pradesh University had promoted Research Associates as Lecturers for which only direct recruitment was provided for, refused to set aside their appointments on the ground that they had been working for more than 11 years.
25) Similarly, in Roshni Devi, Shravan Kumar etc. vs. State of Haryana, AIR 1998 SC 3268, the Supreme Court, while noticing that the recruitment to the posts of Clerks in the State of Haryana had not been made in accordance with the law but because the equity was in favour of those persons who had already been appointed and served for more than 9 years, refused to annul their appointments
26) Thus, it has been the consistent view of the Supreme Court that even if there is some minor irregularity in selection of a candidate but if such a candidate has put in a number of years of service, it may not be advisable to disturb his appointment.
Page 14 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018
27) While considering the facts of the instant case in the light of the aforesaid judicial precedents, we have to bear in mind the fact that the appellant was engaged as an Education Volunteer in the year 2004 under EGS scheme which has since been abandoned. Upon conversion of EGS Centre into a Primary School, appellant's engagement was converted to Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher, as per the relevant scheme. Thereafter in the year 2014, the appellant came to be appointed as a General Line teacher in the said school. There is no dispute to the fact that the appellant has been engaged as an Education Volunteer and thereafter as Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher and General Line teacher by the competent authorities. We have also held that at the time of making engagement of the appellant as an Education Volunteer, substantial compliance to the guidelines has been made. In these circumstances, the equity tilts heavily in favour of the appellant. Her case in equity becomes all the more strong in the light of the fact that the scheme under which the Education Volunteers were engaged has already been abandoned and even if we quash the engagement of the appellant, the writ petitioner cannot be engaged as an Education Volunteer under a scheme which has already been wound up. Thus, even if the case of the writ petitioner is accepted, no relief can be granted in her favour and it would amount to issuing a futile writ, which we are not inclined to do.
28) Apart from the above, having served for many years, the appellant may have by now become over age and her family may be dependent upon her earnings. If her engagement is quashed at this point of time, she will have no other place to go and the quashment of her engagement will work very harshly against her dependents. As against this, the writ petitioner, admittedly, is working as an Anganwadi Worker and she cannot be appointed as an Education Volunteer as of now. Therefore, balance of equity tilts heavily in favour of the appellant. This aspect of the case has been totally ignored by the learned Writ Court while passing the impugned judgment.
29) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment passed by the learned Writ Court is set aside and the engagement/appointment of the appellant as an Education Volunteer, Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher and General Line Teacher is upheld."
16.As can be seen from perusal of supra judgement that appellant (Shazia Bashir) in LPASW no.174/2018 had been working since 2004 and there was no dispute about the said fact, so it was held by the Division Page 15 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018 Bench that equity heavily tilted in favour of appellant inasmuch as her case in equity becomes all the more strong in the light of the fact that the scheme had already been abandoned and even if engagement of appellant was quashed, the writ petitioner therein could not be engaged under a scheme which has already been wound up.
In the case in hand, Nazir Ahmad Dar - respondent no.9 in SWP no.2112/2011 (petitioner in SWP no.2378/2018) has been serving respondent-department as ReT right from 26th July 2011. He has completed 13 years, and resultantly equity heavily tilts in favour of Nazir Ahmad Dar, entitling him to be regularized, as such.
17.It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that ReT Scheme has already been wound up in terms of Government Order no.919-Edu of 2018 dated 16th November 2018. Although the said Government order was put to challenge yet the Division Bench of this Court vide judgement dated 4th February 2023, passed in a bunch of cases with lead case being SWP no.3004/2018, titled as Ruksana Jabeen v. State of J&K and others, has upheld the said government order. In such circumstances, reliefs claimed by petitioner in SWP no.2112/2011 have become redundant.
18.The judgements relied upon by Mr H. Suhail Ishtiaq, learned counsel for petitioner in SWP no.2112/2011, viz. judgement dated 3rd October 2018 in SWP no.1794/2011; M.S.Patil, Dr. v. Gulbarga University and others, 2010 AIR SC 3783; Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. and another v. Dharminder Singh, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 999, are distinguishable in facts and circumstances of the present case and, as such, are not beneficial or useful to the said petitioner's case.
Page 16 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018
19.In view of above writ petition, being SWP no.211/2011 titled as Mohammad Yousuf Dar v. State of J&K and others, is dismissed with connected CM(s). Interim direction, if any, passed therein shall stand vacated.
20.Writ petition, viz. SWP no.2378/2018 titled as Nazir Ahmad Dar v. State of J&K and others, is allowed and Order no.1238-DSEK of 2018 dated 26th September 2018 passed by Director, School Education, Kashmir (respondent no.2) is quashed and as a sequel thereof, respondents are directed to regularize the services of petitioner as General Line Teacher from the date he become entitled thereto with all consequential service benefits.
(Vinod Chatterji Koul) Judge Srinagar 04.07.2024 Ajaz Ahmad, Secy.
Whether approved for reporting? Yes/No. Page 17 SWP no.2112/2011 c/w SWP no.2378/2018