##PAGE1##

TA/8120/2021

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU

(RESERVED)

Hearing through video conferencing

Transfer Application No. 8120/2021

Reserved on: - 30/07/2025

Pronounced on: - 22.12.2025

HON’BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, MEMBER (A)

Sajda Parveen Age 38years D/o Safaid Khan R/o Chandak,

Tehsil Haveli and District Poonch .

…Applicant

(Advocate: - Mr. M. Tariq Mughal)

Versus

1. State of J&K through Commissioner/Secretary, Education

Department Govt. of Jammu and Kashmir, New Secretariat Jammu.

2. Director School of Education , Muthi Jammu.

3. Chief Education officer poonch.

4. Zonal Education Officer Nagali, poonch.

5. Zonal Education Officer Surankote ,Poonch .

6. Chairman Jammu and Kashmir Service Selection Board, Sehkari

Bhawan , Near Bahu plaza Tehsil And District Jammu.

HARSHIT Digitally signed

by HARSHIT

YADAV

YADAV

TA/8120/2021

7. Secretary Jammu And Kashmir Service Selection Board , Sehkari

Bhawan Near Bahu Plaza Tehsil and district Jammu.

8. Yasser Ahmed S/o Janaid Ahmed R/o Village Sania, Tehsil

Suronkote and District Poonch.

9. Lal Hussain S/o Mohd Sharief R/o village Dingla, Tehsil Haveli

and District Poonch.

…Respondents

(Advocate: - Mr. Rajesh Thappa, AAG, Mr. Sudesh Magotra, AAG)

HARSHIT Digitally signed

by HARSHIT

YADAV

YADAV

TA/8120/2021

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The SWP No.1328/2016 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court

of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A

No.8120/2021 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court seeking

following relief: -

a) Writ of certiorari, for the quashment of selection and

appointment of private respondents for the post of teacher,

District cadre Poonch, vide advt. notification No. 02 of 2012

dated 07-11-2012 item No. 078 issued by the respondent No.7

because private respondents are low meritorious and less

qualified and are not selected as per rule and norms mentioned

in the advertisement notice and as per reservation rule,

petitioner's right of selection is deprived which is illegal,

arbitrary and against the law and petitioner is seeking the

quashment of the same and may also seeking quashment of the

selection/placement of private respondents.

b) Writ of certiorari, for the quashment of order of respondent

No.1 vide No. Edu-11/213/2007 dated 20-05-2014 and for the

quashment of appointment orders of private respondents issued

vide No.CEO/Estt/8921-23, No.CEO/Estt/8918-20 dated 22-8-

2014 and may also quash the joining report of the private

respondents because official respondents have made this

appointment in violation of this Hon'ble High Court direction

dated 14-03-2014 passed in SWP No.720/2014 in which select

list of the private respondents was stayed by this Hon'ble court

and in spite of stay official respondents issued appointment

HARSHIT Digitally signed

by HARSHIT

YADAV

YADAV

TA/8120/2021

orders and joined on the posts of teacher to private respondents

which is illegal, arbitrary and with malatide intention required

to be quashed.

c) Writ of Mandamus, commanding the official respondents to

select and appoint to the petitioner for the post of teacher,

District Cadre Poonch being more qualified and meritorious to

private respondents and also coming in the zone of

consideration on the basis of ALC category as is evident from

the short list, qualification certificates.

d) Writ of Mandamus, commanding the official respondents to

select the petitioner under ALC category because both the

candidates cannot be selected from ST category because it is in

violation of reservation rule because 100% reservation cannot

be provided to any one class of category and petitioner

deserves to be appointed visually handicapped and being

residence of ALC area under the reservation policy.

e) 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 issued in favour of the petitioners and against the

respondents.”

3. The f