The involvement of disputed questions of fact rendered the writ petition not maintainable, and the petitioner was directed to seek remedy in a competent Court of law.

1. Vide order dated 26.09.2005 issued by respondent No.4, petitioner was engaged as Education Volunteer (EV) in EGS Centre, Kala Chiti Batti Village Sanghiot on the recommendations of Village Education Committee for a period of one year on monthly remuneration of Rs.1000/- per month.

2. Petitioner filed SWP No. 278/2010 claiming that he was working as EV in EGC Centre for a period of five years w.e.f 26.09.2005, therefore, he should be converted as ReT w.e.f the year 2010 and be paid remuneration for the period, he had worked. The aforementioned writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed SWP No. 1401/2012 in which, this Court while issuing notice, directed the respondents to produce the record of appointment of the petitioner as also to consider the claim of the petitioner for remuneration to which he was legally entitled to. Thereafter, contempt petition was filed and the same was closed vide order dated 1st November, 2012 by directing the respondents to comply with the order of this Court dated 12.06.2012 in SWP No. 1401/2012 and to report compliance before the Registry within four weeks.

4. Thereafter, vide order dated 01.06.2013 in SWP No. 1401/2012, while taking note that the stand of the parties was contradictory and raised disputed questions of fact, the Director School Education, Jammu was directed to conduct an enquiry within a period of one month after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner where after report was to be submitted.

5. In compliance of the aforementioned directions, Director School Education Jammu vide order dated 27.07.2013 appointed Joint Director (Trg)/Principal State Institute of Education, Jammu as Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer visited the spot where ZEO concerned and VEC members along with the petitioner were present. All concerned were heard by the Enquiry Officer, who recorded that majority of the officials/persons present on spot did not support the claim of the petitioner. The enquiry officer further recorded that no EGS Centre with the name of Kalachiti was established according to reconciliation list of the Government, besides there was no official record of the petitioner having been served any order of EV and as per report of ZEO Balakote, copy of appointment order produced by Shabir Hussain i.e petitioner herein was forged and he had managed such forged order by using fluid on the order of some other candidate. On the basis of the same, the petitioner’s claim was rejected.

6. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel. In view of highly disputed questions of fact, it would be appropriate that the petitioner be relegated to avail his remedy, otherwise than by way of writ petition, before the competent Court of law in accordance with the provisions of law applicable. Accordingly, while holding that the writ petition is not maintainable on account of the involvement of disputed questions of fact, petitioner is relegated to avail his remedy before a competent Court of law in accordance with the provisions of law applicable. It would be open to the petitioner to take all pleas as are open to him before the competent Court of law.

7. Writ petition is disposed of in the light of the position as noted above.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document