Back
2013 Supreme(J&K) 528
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Hasnain Massodi, J.
Parveena Ahad Bhat -Appellant
Versus
State Of J&K & Ors. -Resopndent
SWP No. 2642-2012, IA No. 4237-2012
Decided On : 09-09-2013
R.A. Jan, Nazima, S.R. Hussain, S.A. Naik.
The qualifications of candidates for ReT positions should align with the curriculum at the Primary and Upper Primary level.
Headnote:
ReT Selection - Education Policy - Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan - [Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, 10+2, B.Sc., Science Subjects, ReT Selection] - The court discussed the policy decision of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan to engage ReTs with Science and Math background, the qualifications required for ReT positions, and the interpretation of 'Science' subjects at the Graduation level. The court emphasized the importance of matching the qualifications of candidates with the curriculum at the Primary and Upper Primary level.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashment of a notification and a direction to engage her against a ReT position. The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner could oppose the inclusion of another candidate in the provisional selection list on available grounds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it, while allowing the petitioner to use the available remedy to oppose the inclusion of another candidate in the provisional selection list.
Issues: The issues revolved around the qualifications required for ReT positions, the interpretation of 'Science' subjects at the Graduation level, and the selection process for ReT positions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of matching the qualifications of candidates with the curriculum at the Primary and Upper Primary level, and upheld the decision based on the interpretation of 'Science' subjects at the Graduation level.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was allowed to oppose the inclusion of another candidate in the provisional selection list on available grounds.
2. Petitioner, respondent No. 6 namely Bilqees Jameela and few other candidates responded to advertisement notice. The official respondents did not finalise selection process with reasonable dispatch, constraining petitioner and one Shoaib Akhter Mir to approach this Court with writ petition, being SWP No. 642/2012, praying for a direction to respondents 4 & 5 to finalise selection process. The ad-interim order passed by Writ Court on 4th April 2012, catalysed the selection process and provisional selection was drawn up and published in local daily on 24th August 2012. The petitioner appeared at Serial No. 01 in the provisional select list while her co-petitioner in SWP No. 642/2012 was shown at Serial No. 02 in the list.
3. The official respondents, however, partly acted on the provisional select list, appointing Shri Shoaib Akhter Mir - petitioner No. l in SWP No. 642/2012, as ReT (Math Stream) in the aforesaid upgraded Primary School. The petitioner aggrieved with failure of respondents 4&5 to issue engagement order in her favour, moved application, being IA No. 4075/2012, in pending petition - SWP No. 642/2012. While matter was pending consideration, respondents 4&5 on 14th December 2012, issued notification, published in local daily on 15th December 2012, showing respondent No. 6 in the present petition, to have been provisionally selected as ReT (Science Stream) in the said upgraded Boys Primary School.
4. Petitioner, aggrieved with notification dated 14th December 2012, has filed writ petition on hand and on strength of grounds urged in the petition, seeks quashment of Notification No. DIPK-11535 dated 14.12.2012 issued by respondent No. 4, published in Daily Aftab on 15.12.2012, whereby respondent No. 6 is shown to have been provisionally selected, against the position of ReT in upgraded Primary School, Dairi, Dangiwacha, under Science stream. Petitioner further prays for a direction, requiring respondents to engage her against the aforesaid ReT position.
5. The official respondents resist writ petition on the grounds that respondent No. 6, having higher qualification in Science, was given preference over petitioner and that petitioner, therefore, did not have any cause to assail notification dated 14.12.2012 or question respondent No. 6's selection. It is pointed out that while both petitioner and respondent No. 6 had Physics, Chemistry and Biology at 10+2 level, making them eligible for advertised position, respondent No. 6, having done B.Sc. with Zoology, Botany and Chemistry, has edge over petitioner who has Geography, Geology and Zoology as subjects at Graduation level. It is insisted that in view of respondent No. 6's higher degree in Science subjects, she deserved to be engaged against ReT position in question and has been rightly selected against said position.
6. I have gone through the pleadings as also record made available by learned Additional Advocate General and have heard learned counsel for parties.
7. Respondents, in the year 2008, to achieve object of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (for short "SSA") took policy decision to engage ReTs with Science and Math background. Respondent no. 5, in compliance of policy decision so taken, while advertising two ReT positions in upgraded Primary School, Dairi, invited applications from candidates h
