SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.:–This matter comes up for final arguments as the Supreme Court in its Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No(s). 1033 of 2021 passed following orders on 28th September, 2021:—

“Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the High Court has to dispose of CWJC No. 9017 of 2021 at an early date.

Therefore, we request the High Court to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Pending application also stands disposed of.”

2. On 24th February, 2021, on the request of the counsels, the case was directed to be listed on 22nd March, 2022 and it was made clear that the pleading shall be completed on the next date. However, the case came up on 4th July, 2022 and directions were again issued to complete the pleadings and remove all the defects whereafter the case has come up today.

3. Heard, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Government counsel and the counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4 at length.

4. The brief, facts which require to be considered for the present dispute are that the petitioner had passed B.Ed. degree from University of Jammu & Kashmir in 2003-2005, whereafter she applied for the post of Niyojit Secondary Teacher and was selected and appointed vide order dated 12th March, 2007. She joined on 13th March, 2007. Respondent No. 4 was appointed vide order dated 5th April, 2007. It has been pointed out that there was no dispute raised with regard to her degree at the time of appointment and after having served for about seven years the petitioner was given the charge of Headmistress. She continued to perform her duties but by the impugned order dated 15th March, 2021, she was directed to hand over charge to respondent no. 4 and was also informed that her service rendered prior to 12.04.2017 stands derecognized vide order dated 15.03.2021 as the qualification of B.Ed. from University of Jammu & Kashmir has been recognized with effect from 12.04.2017. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.03.2021 and by an amendment application has also challenged the order passed by the State Government dated 28th May, 2019, which is the basis for passing of the order dated 15th March, 2021.

5. Learned senior counsel submits that the order dated 28th May,2019, is per se bad in law and the consequential order of 15th March, 2021 is also unjustified

6. Learned counsel has taken this Court to the order dated 28th May, 2019 which is stated to have been issued in compliance of the orders passed by the Supreme Court and submits that the authorities have wholly mis-interpreted and misunderstood the orders passed by the Supreme Court in the S.L.P. disposed of on 18.01.2019. Learned counsel submits that the Apex Court has granted relief to all the employees who were already in employment and also to those who have to be employed. In view thereof, the services rendered by employees who obtained B.Ed. From Jammu & Kashmir prior to issuing of notification dated 12.04.2017, could not be ignored and they could not be treated to be fresh appointees as on 12.04.2017. The order was thus vitiated on other grounds. Learned counsel has relied on judgment passed by the Full Bench of this Court in case of Rama Shankar Patel and Others vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2019(3) P.L.J.R. 1291.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Government supports the order passed by the respondent-State and submits that since the notification was issued on 12.04.2017, the service of the already employed teachers can only be counted from 12.04.2017 as interpreted by the State Government. The degree awarded by Jammu & Kashmir University has been recognized from 12.04.2017 onwards alone.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4 has also supported the submissions made by the Government counsel and submits that so far as respondent no. 4 is concerned, she has acquired her qualifications from another Universi