AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Instant application seeking extension of time for annexing/depositing the requisite Court fee/affidavits/other requisite documents with the instant
petition, in view of the grounds urged therein, is allowed. The applicant shall do the needful within a period of one week from the date of
announcement of lifting of lockdown on account of COVID-19 by the Government.
Application is disposed of.
1 Through the medium of instant petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 17.05.2010 issued by the Chief Education Officer, Budgam in terms
whereof the opening of Primary School at village Dar Mohalla Talapora has been withdrawn. A direction to the respondents to establish the Primary
School at village Dar Mohalla Talapora has also been sought. Apart from this, a direction to the respondents to conclude the selection process initiated
in pursuance of an Advertisement Notice dated 27.03.2010 and to issue consequent engagement order in favour of the petitioner as ReT teacher for
Primary School, Dar Mohalla Talapora has also been sought.
2 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the petition.
3 It appears that vide order No. CEOB/Plg/open/9-10//20292-95 dated: 18-03-2010 passed by the Chief Education Officer, Budgam, a proposal for
opening of Primary Schools at village Rather Mohalla and Dar Mohalla Talapora was issued. The said order, it seems, has been withdrawn by
respondent No.4 vide its order dated 17.05.2010 which is impugned herein.
4 While the initial order dated 18.03.2010 was in operation, respondent No.5 had issued an Advertisement Notice dated 27.03.2010 inviting
applications from the eligible candidates for engagement of ReT teachers in the Schools established in terms of order dated 18.03.2010. The petitioner
had applied in pursuance of the said Advertisement Notice. However, when the order whereby the Schools in question were established was
withdrawn vide the impugned order dated 17.05.2010, the selection process was abandoned by the respondents.
5 It appears that the petitioner had challenged the action of the respondents by filing a Civil Suit before the Court of learned Sub-Judge (CJM)
Budgam. The said Suit came to be dismissed for non prosecution on 07.12.2019. Instead of filing an application for restoration of the said Suit, the
petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition challenging the impugned order after more than ten years of its issuance. Since the
petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy of pursuing the aforesaid suit by filing an application for its restoration before the concerned Civil
Court, as such, the instant writ petition is not maintainable. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach
the concerned Civil Court seeking restoration of the aforesaid Suit and if and when such an application is made by the petitioner before the concerned
Civil Court, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously by the said Court in accordance with law.