Back
2021 Supreme(J&K) 198
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
SANJAY DHAR, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
Shazia Bashir – Appellant
Versus
Tanveera Akhter and Others – Respondents
LPASW No. 174 of 2018
Decided On : 11-08-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. M.A. Qayoom, Mr. Mian Tufail.
For the Respondents: Mr. M.A. Beigh, Mr. Shah Aamir.
Point of Law: Education Volunteers - Selection process - If there is some minor irregularity in selection of a candidate but if such a candidate has put in a number of years of service, it may not be advisable to disturb his appointment.
Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14 and 16 - Violated the terms of her engagement - Notice - Whether learned Writ Court was justified in holding - Whether in instant case there was dissemination of information or notice with regard to engagement of an Education Volunteer in the concerned habitation. According to learned Writ Court, pasting of a notice of advertisement notice on an unknown walnut tree or electric pole does not fulfill the requirement of publication of advertisement notice.
Finding of the Court:
Court have to bear in mind fact that appellant was engaged as an Education Volunteer in year 2004 under EGS scheme which has since been abandoned - Appellant came to be appointed as a General Line teacher in the said school - There is no dispute to fact that appellant has been engaged as an Education Volunteer and thereafter as Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher and General Line teacher by competent authorities – Court have also held that at the time of making engagement of appellant as an Education Volunteer, substantial compliance to the guidelines has been made - Education Volunteers were engaged has already been abandoned and even if we quash engagement of the appellant, writ petitioner cannot be engaged as an Education Volunteer under a scheme which has already been wound up.
Result: Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY DHAR, J.
1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 30.10.2018 passed by the Writ Court in SWP No. 410/2005 filed by respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner) whereby the said respondent had challenged the engagement of the appellant as Education Volunteer and her subsequent engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher and General Line Teacher. Vide the impugned judgment and order dated 30.10.2018, the learned Writ Court has allowed the writ petition and the engagement of appellant as Education Volunteer and her subsequent engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher as well as her appointment as General Line Teacher has been quashed.
2. As per the case projected before the Writ Court, the writ petitioner as well as appellant are residents of Gousia Colony Vessu, Anantnag, and both of them had secured qualification of 10+2. According to the writ petitioner, at the time when appellant was engaged as an Education Volunteer in EGS Centre, Vessu, in the year 2004, the father of the appellant, who happened to be the headmaster of a local school, had managed to suppress the advertisement notice, as a result of which the writ petitioner and several other eligible candidates could not offer their candidature for engagement as Education Volunteer. Thus, the position of Education Volunteer was filled up by the official respondents without resorting to proper advertisement, as a consequence whereof the appellant herein came to be engaged as an Education Volunteer in terms of engagement order dated 16.12.2004. According to the writ petitioner, the said engagement of the appellant is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and, as such, is unsustainable in law.
3. Another contention that was raised by the writ petitioner before the Writ Court was that the appellant herein had obtained B. Com degree from Government Degree College, Anantnag, as a regular candidate though she was shown to have worked as an Education Volunteer during the same period. According to the writ petitioner by doing so, the appellant has violated the terms of her engagement.
4. The writ petitioner is stated to have approached Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, bringing to his notice the alleged fraud committed by Zonal Education officer, Qazigund-respondent No. 5 herein, and on the basis of her application, an enquiry was set up by the Deputy Commissioner concerned. During the currency of the enquiry, the respondent No. 5 is stated to have issued an order whereby the engagement of appellant herein was kept in abeyance. Against the said order, writ petition bearing SWP No. 15/2015 came to be filed by the appellant wherein the said order of Zonal Education Officer, Qazigund, was stayed. The writ petitioner filed an application seeking impleadment in the said petition but her application was dismissed by the Court with liberty to file a separate writ petition, as a result of which the writ petitioner filed a separate petition which is subject matter of instant appeal. SWP No. 15/2015, later on came to be dismissed as withdrawn and the order whereby engagement of the appellant as Education Volunteer was kept in abeyance was withdrawn by the official respondents.
5. During the pendency of the writ petition, which is subject matter of instant appeal, the writ petitioner amended the petition on a couple of occasions so as to throw challenge to the appellant’s engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher and thereafter as General Line Teacher. The basic grounds of challenge to the engagement of the appellant remained unaltered.
6. The writ petition was contested by the appellant as well as by the official respondents. In their response, the official respondents took a stand that the advertisement notice was duly pasted at a conspicuous place in the locality where the EGS Centre was set up and they denied the assertion of the writ petitioner that she was not informed about the advertisement notice. The appellant in her response defended h
