Jawaida Bano vs Union Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir & Ors.

Jawaida Bano, aged about 45 years, D/o Habibullah Dar, R/o Ghat, Palhalan Teshil Pattan and District Baramulla. Code: 193121.

……Applicant

By Advocate : Mr. Sameer Hassan Dar VERSUS

The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the year 2005, respondent No.4 issued Notification No. 1521-27 dated 24.08.2005, inviting applications from eligible candidates possessing Matriculation and above qualifications for engagement as Education Volunteers on a consolidated honorarium of ₹1,000 per month under the Rehbar-e-Taleem pattern for establishment of EGS Centres. Pursuant thereto, the applicant applied and was Central Administrative Tribunal engaged as an Education Volunteer at EGS Centre Ghat Gopallan.

It is further submitted that pursuant to Government Order No. 332-Edu of 2008, under which 3617 EGS Centres were upgraded, the EGS Centre where the applicant was working was also upgraded, figuring at Serial No. 142 in the relevant list. The applicant was thereafter converted/elevated as Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) vide order dated 12.05.2018 issued by respondent No.3, with effect from 25.10.2010, after she passed her 12th examination, against a vacant post of ReT SSA in Middle School Wanigam Bala, Zone Nehalpora.

The applicant states that she had appeared in the 12th examination in 1996 but could not qualify. Thereafter, she qualified Adeeb Urdu through the Urdu Board, Aligarh, in 2004 and subsequently, in 2009, appeared for and passed the English subject before the Board of School Education under Roll No. 412501. On the basis of these Central Administrative Tribunal^{qualifications, she claims to have fulfilled the prescribed} conditions for conversion from ReT to RReT.

It is submitted that one Basher Ahmad Mir subsequently filed an online complaint alleging that the applicant's 12th-class qualification certificate was fake and that she was, therefore, ineligible for regularisation. According to the applicant, the complaint was motivated by personal animosity with her in-laws. On the basis of the said complaint, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 halted the applicant's regularisation/conversion from ReT to RReT and sought verification of her educational certificates from the concerned authorities.

The applicant submits that the concerned authorities/Board subsequently verified her certificates as genuine and correct and that the Crime Branch and other agencies also submitted reports in her favour. Despite such verification, the respondents did not proceed with her regularisation. It is further submitted that the applicant has repeatedly approached the respondent authorities and Central Administrative Tribunal^{submitted several representations, including online} representations, but her claim has not been decided.

The applicant claims that she has been working as a ReT since 2010 and that her regularisation has remained pending on account of the complaint regarding her educational qualification, despite the alleged verification establishing the genuineness of her qualification. She submits that she has been compelled to approach the authorities repeatedly and has been “tossed from pillar to post” for several years. She also submitted a detailed representation to the respondents, but no formal order regarding her regularisation was passed.

The applicant is, therefore, aggrieved by the respondents' failure to regularise/convert her from ReT to RReT/Regular Teacher, despite the earlier conversion order dated 12.05.2018 and the subsequent verification of her educational qualifications. She also claims entitlement to consideration for regularisation against the post of General Line Teacher, asserting that she possesses the Central Administrative Tribunal^{requisite 12th-class qualification.}

It is further submitted that the respondents were duty-bound to act upon the verification reports and certificates establishing the genuineness of her qualification and to issue a formal regularisation order. The applicant also claims that similarly situated teachers have already been regularised and alleges discrimination and violation of the principle of equality. She accordingly seeks regularisation from the date of her entitlement, along with consequential service benefits including arrears of salary, promotional benefits and seniority.

The applicant has also sought a direction to respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to regularise her services as RReT/Regular Teacher from the date she became entitled to such regularisation, particularly in pursuance of the order dated 12.05.2018 issued by respondent No.3. As an interim measure, she seeks consideration and decision of her representation dated 22.04.2025 regarding regularisation as RReT/Regular Teacher.

Central Administrative Tribunal^{10.However, after arguing the matter for some time, learned} counsel for the applicant submits that the interests of justice would be adequately served if the present Original Application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to treat the same as a representation and consider the claims raised therein, together with the documents annexed thereto, strictly in accordance with law and within a stipulated period.

Mr. Satinder Singh, learned AAG, appearing on advance notice, submits that the present Original Application may be disposed of with appropriate directions, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents. 12.Having considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material placed on record, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present Original Application pending, particularly in view of the limited prayer made on behalf of the applicant.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the Central Administrative Tribunal^{merits of the case or the rival claims of the parties, the} present Original Application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to treat the same as a representation and to consider the claims and assertions made therein, along with the documents annexed thereto, including the representation dated 22.04.2025 and the verification reports relied upon by the applicant, strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations and law governing the field.

The respondents shall pass a detailed, reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon them. The respondents shall thereafter communicate the order so passed to the applicant within a period of one week.

It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the applicant's claim, and all questions of fact and law are left open to be considered by the competent authority while passing the aforesaid order 16.With the aforesaid directions, the Original Application Central Administrative Tribunal^{stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s),} if any, shall also stand disposed of.

No order as to costs.

Registry shall consign the record to the Record Room after due compliance.