Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1199
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, J, MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, A
Rekha Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of School Education Ut Of J&k – Respondent
T.A./2559/2020
Mr. Rahul Pant, Sr. Adv. and Mr. Sudesh Magotra (learned AAG)
Merit should not suffer due to administrative lapses; retrospective appointment granted for notional seniority without monetary benefits.
Headnote:(A) Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board Act - Appointment process - The petitioner sought retrospective appointment as a teacher from 15.04.2013, claiming unfair exclusion from selection despite merit - The court acknowledged procedural delays and directed notional seniority from that date, affirming merit should not suffer due to administrative lapses. (Paras 12, 13, 14)
(B) Res-judicata - The court held that the current petition is barred by res-judicata as the petitioner did not claim retrospective benefits in the earlier petition, and the previous judgment attained finality. (Paras 4, 7)
(C) Fairness and Equity - The court emphasized that allowing candidates with lesser merit to retain an unfair advantage violates principles of equal treatment in public employment. (Paras 12, 13)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner applied for a teacher position but was initially excluded due to residency requirements. After legal intervention, she was appointed in 2018, while others with lesser merit were appointed in 2013.
Findings of Court:
The petitioner shall be entitled to notional seniority from 15.04.2013, but not to any monetary benefits prior to her appointment.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to retrospective appointment and seniority despite previous judgments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that merit should prevail over administrative delays, allowing the petitioner notional seniority while denying back wages.
Result: The TA is allowed, granting notional seniority from 15.04.2013 without monetary benefits.
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 703/2019 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/2559/2020 by the Registry of this Tribunal.
2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court with following prayer:
a) “Writ, order of direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents no.1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner against the post of teacher in the District Cadre Kathua notionally with all consequential benefits w.e.f. 15.04.2013 i.e. the date when persons with lesser merit in the same select list were appointed in pursuance to the select list issued by the respondent no.4-Board vide its No.SSB/Sel/Secy/13/294-96 dated 11.01.2013 in pursuance to advertisement notice no. 7 of 2010 dated 12.11.2020.
b) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents along with cost.”
3. The facts of the case as averred by the petitioner in her pleadings, are as follows: -
a) Pursuant to Advertisement Notice No. 07 of 2010 dated 12.11.2010, applications were invited to fill vacancies for the post of teachers in the District Cadre, Kathua. The petitioner applied for the post but was not allowed to participate in the selection process on the ground that she had not been residing in the District of Kathua for 15 years prior to the issuance of the advertisement.
b) Aggrieved by this exclusion, the petitioner approached the Hon’ble Court through SWP No. 1086 of 2011, challenging the refusal of the J&K Services Selection Board to permit her participation in the selection process. The Hon’ble Court, vide its order dated 19.05.2011, allowed the petitioner to participate in the interview.
c) Subsequently, vide order dated 01.10.2012, the Respondent-Board was directed to produce the petitioner's result in a sealed cover. However, the matter remained pending until 08.11.2013, when the Court decided the case in light of an earlier judgment dated 24.10.2013 in SWP No. 947 of 2011, which dealt with an identical issue. Despite this, other candidates with lesser merit than the petitioner were recommended and appointed as teachers in the School Education Department in District Cadre, Kathua on 15.04.2013.
d) Against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, the respondent filed a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA), but the same was withdrawn on 29.02.2016, thereby allowing the implementation of the judgment in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner later filed a contempt petition (COA No. 235/2014) titled Rekha Sharma vs. Hirdesh Kumar Singh & Another, wherein the Hon’ble Court directed the concerned respondent to appear in person on 18.12.2017.
e) Following the Court's intervention, respondent no. 4, vide Order No. 84-SSB of 2017 dated 02.03.2017, recommended the petitioner’s case for appointment to the post of teacher in District Cadre, Kathua. Subsequently, respondent no. 3, through Order No. CEOK/56529-33 dated 31.03.2018, issued the appointment order in favor of the petitioner. However, this appointment was made prospective in nature, whereas other candidates, who were lower in merit than the petitioner, had been appointed in 2013 itself.
4. The respondents have filed their written statement wherein they have averred as follows: -
a) The respondents submit that the present writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as it is barred by the doctrine of res-judicata. The petitioner had previously filed SWP No.1086/2011 (Rekha Sharma & Ors V. State & Ors), in which the Hon’ble Court had directed the respondents to consider the petitioner’s claim. The petitioner failed to claim retrospective appointment in that petition, and the judgment dated 08.11.2013 attained finality without any challenge. Therefore, the current petition (SWP No.703/2018) seeking retrospective appointment
