The court clarified the applicability of Government Order No. 288-Edu of 2009, emphasizing that the order does not allow for the clubbing of habitations and specified the conditions that must be met for the order to apply.

Respondent No.3, vide Advertisement Notification dated 05.06.2015, invited applications for the engagement of ReTs against the vacant posts available in different schools of Zone Gool, Ramban and Ukhral of District Ramban. One post of ReT in New Primary School, Mottta of revenue village Neera was also notified for making selection. The petitioner, claiming to be the resident of habitation Motta and otherwise eligible, submitted her application form to respondent No.4. A tentative merit panel of the eligible candidates for selection against the available post of ReT in New Primary School, Motta has been prepared. The petitioner figures at S.No.12, whereas respondent Nos.7 and 8 figure at S.Nos. 9 and 10. On the basis of inter se merit, respondent No.7 with the qualification of B.A. was found to be most meritorious and placed at S.No.1 of the proposed select panel followed by respondent No.8, who, in view of his merit, was placed at S.No.2. As is apparent from the proposed select panel, it was prepared by respondent No.4 on the recommendations of the Village Education Committee concerned. The habitation was taken as a unit in terms of Government Order No. 288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009.

2. Feeling aggrieved of the empanelment of respondent Nos. 7 and 8 in the proposed select list, the petitioner has filed the instant petition. The select panel proposed by respondent No.4 has been assailed by the petitioner, primarily, on the ground that the petitioner is the only eligible candidate belonging to habitation Motta, who has applied for the aforesaid post and respondent Nos. 7 and 8, who belong to other habitations of revenue village Neera, are not eligible to be engaged as ReT having regard to the provisions of Government Order No. 288-Edu of 2009 (supra).

3. The respondents have filed their objections. In the objections filed by the official respondents, stand taken is that the habitation Motta qualifies to be a habitation for the purposes of applicability of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 (supra) and, therefore, the candidates belonging to habitation Motta alone have been considered. It is submitted that in response to the aforesaid Advertisement Notification, the respondents received as many as 12 application forms, out of which, three candidates i.e. respondent Nos. 7 and 8 and the petitioner were found to be hailing from habitation Motta and on the recommendations of the Village Education Committee concerned and also having regard to the inter se merit of aforesaid three candidates, respondent Nos. 7 was placed at S.No.1 of the proposed select panel followed by respondent No.8, who was placed at S.No.2. The official respondents, however, in para No.4 of the objections have spilled the beans by stating that the population of habitation Motta which includes the other hamlets like Galli, Khora, Kahinag and Prehinga is more than 300 souls. Similarly, in para No.10 of the objections, the official respondents by relaying upon a certificate issued by AEE PMGSY have stated that the distance of the habitation Motta from Galli is 755 meters. Though, it is not denied by the official respondents that respondent No.7 is not the resident of habitation Motta, yet it has been submitted that hamlet Galli, to which respondent No.7 belongs, is situated at a distance of less than 1 km and, therefore, respondent No.7 shall be deemed to be the resident of habitation Motta.

4. The sum and substance of the stand taken by the official respondents is that though the habitation/hamlet Motta in itself may not meet the requirements of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 (supra), yet by including the adjoining hamlets viz. Galli, Khora, Kahinag and Prehinga which are situated within the distance of 1 km, the habitation Motta qualifies to be a revenue village/village for the purposes of applicability of Government Order No. 288-Edu of 2009 (supra).

5. Respondent No.7, who has been proposed to be selected, has also filed objections. The stand tak