Tabasum Rajab And Others vs State Of JK And Others

Sindhu Sharma, J

The Office of Zonal Education Officer, Shangus, issued an Advertisement Notice dated 27.08.2012, for filling up the vacancies of teachers in Socially and Educationally backward area of Zone Shangus on ReT pattern prospectively for a period of two years. Amongst the vacancies advertised were M/S Pushroo, GMS Dethu and M/S Kotheir as well.

The petitioners, being eligible, participated in the Selection process, the tentative select list for M/S Pushroo, GMS Dethu and M/S Kotheir was issued on 01.01.2012, and the petitioners were selected for their engagement on the basis of their merit. The selection of the petitioners was approved and they were engaged as R-e-T teachers by the Chief Education Officer, Anantnag, on 08.06.2013, and 10.06.2013.

The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent after their engagement they were performed their duties, vide his communication No. DSEK/Legal/225/12/5478-81 dated 18.07.2013, their engagement was kept in abeyance by respondent no. 2 till clarification in the matter was received from the Administrative Department.

The contention of the petitioners is that they have been engaged after undergone regular selection process, and have joined their duties after approval of the same by the respondents, but the respondents without any notice to them have kept their engagement in abeyance, without any reason.

This Court while issuing notice in this petition on 30.08.2013, stayed the impugned communication dated 18.07.2013. During the pendency of this petition this Court directed the respondents to release the salary of the petitioners. The petitioners again preferred an application bearing IA no. 01.2018, seeking regularization of their services as General Line Teacher as they had completed five years services on 10.06.2018, and 05.06.2018. This application was considered by this Court on 20.10.2018 and the respondents were directed to consider the claim of the petitioners for their regularization in service along with their entitlement for consequential benefits.

There is not even a whisper of any allegation against the petitioners for their selection or engagement to the post of ReT. The respondents despite more than seven years after the passing of the order have failed to give any plausible explanation for keeping the engagement of the petitioners in abeyance. The petitioners have been performing their duties for more than ten years now.

It is also submitted that the services of petitioner no.1 have also been regularized as General Line Teacher. Despite pendency for almost 10 years, the respondents have failed to show any cause which prompted them to issue the impugned order keeping petitioners’ engagement in abeyance.

Admittedly, the selection of the petitioners have been made pursuant to Advertisement Notice. The selection process in which petitioners had participated and found meritorious, culminated in their engagement as ReTs in the aforesaid schools. The record of domicile is hanging over their engagements for the last ten years despite their regularization of their services.

Till date no cogent reason for keeping their engagement in abeyance has been put forth by the respondents for the last ten years, as such, the petitioners, who had been selected under the Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme, are entitled to regularization as General Line Teachers in terms of the Scheme and all the consequential benefits from the date they become eligible.

For the forgoing reasons, this petition is allowed. Impugned communication bearing No. DSEK/Legal/225/12/5478-81 dated 18.07.2013, is quashed. The petitioners are held entitled to regularization of their services as General Line Teachers in terms of ReT Scheme with all the consequential benefits.