Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Mohammad Umar Ullah Rather vs State (Now Ut) Of J&K And Ors on 3 January, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
SWP No. 2143/2015
Reserved On: 18th of December, 2024
Pronounced On: 3rd of January, 2025.
Mohammad Umar Ullah Rather
... Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr R. A. Jan, Senior Advocate with
Mr Syed Yahaya, Advocate.
V/s
State (now UT) of J&K and Ors.
... Respondent(s)
Through: –
Mr Furqan Yaqoob Sofi, Government Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M. A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE
(JUDGMENT)
01. The case of the Petitioner, as pleaded in the Petition on hand, is
that in terms of Advertisement Notice published in the Daily Rising
Kashmir, Srinagar in its edition dated 2ndof May, 2013 as also in the Daily
Srinagar Times in its edition dated 4th of May, 2013, applications on plain
papers came to be invited from educated youths of Village Shistergam on
habitation basis, for having educational qualification of 10+2 and above,
with a stipulation that only those candidates having Mathematics and
Science background should apply within the cut of date viz. 07 days after
the publication of the said Notice.
02. The Petitioner, being possessed of the requisite qualification,
submitted his application form supported by the requisite documents for his
selection and consequent engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleem (Science) in the
newly upgraded Primary School, Shistergam.
Page 2 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
03. Accordingly, the candidature of the Petitioner, along with other
eligible candidates, was entertained and the selection process, as per the
procedure prescribed was undertaken, whereafter, a tentative select list
came to be drawn and notified by the Respondent No.5 vide notification
published in daily Greater Kashmir in its edition dated 3rd of June, 2013.
04. Thereafter, objections were invited from the aggrieved
persons, if any, with respect to the said tentative select list, to be submitted
in the office of Respondent No.6.The Respondent Nos. 8 and 9, for the
obvious reason of not having any valid cause or reason, either in fact or in
law, to contest the legal validity of the tentative select list, chose not to
avail the opportunity of objecting to the tentative select list, as afforded vide
the aforesaid notification, instead, rushed to this Court by filing Writ
Petition bearing SWP No. 1068/2023, thereby impugning the aforesaid
tentative select list.
05. In the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9, they
pleaded that they are possessed of the eligibility prescribed as regards the
residence in the Advertisement Notice, however, the said assertion, on
scrutiny by the concerned Authorities, including the Respondent Nos. 3 and
7, were found to be false and baseless. Resultantly, a team of Officers was
appointed to visit the spot and submit a factual report thereof, whereafter,
the said team undertook the requisite exercise and, on 7th of February, 2014,
submitted a detailed report to the Respondent No.3. However, despite the
said report, the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9, in connivance of the official
Respondents, were able to obtain and get the requisite State Subject
certificates as per their needs and requirements depending
upon the post/position advertised. Accordingly, the Writ Petition filed by
the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 was disposed of by this Court vide Judgment
dated 29th of May, 2015, whereafter, in purported compliance of the said
Judgment passed by this Court, the Respondent No.3-Deputy
Commissioner, Anantnag issued Order No. DCA/Lit/015-382-84 dated 29th
of July, 2025.
Page 3 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
06. The Petitioner has assailed the validity of the aforesaid Order
dated 29th of July, 2025 issued by the Respondent No.3 through the medium
of the present Writ Petition, primarily, on the ground that the same has
been, in fact, issued in violation of the directions passed by this Court vide
Judgment dated 29th of May, 2015. It has been stated during the course of
the proceedings in the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9,
being SWP No. 1068/2013, it had been clearly established that the
Petitioners therein/ Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 herein are residents of Village
Sheikhpora and not village Shistergam habitation, which fact has not been
taken into consideration by the Respondent No.3, while issuing the
impugned Order.
07. The Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6, in their Objections, have
stated that the present Writ Petition involves controversy regarding the
engagement of ReTs (Tehbar-i-Taleem)for Upgraded Primary School to the
Middle School, Shistergam, however, having regard to the decision of the
State Administrative Council, followed by Government Order No. 919-Edu
of 2018 dated 16th of November, 2018, the Writ Petition has been rendered
infructuous, therefore, same deserves to be dismissed, as the Government
has imposed blanket ban on engagement of ReTs; that owing to the
upgradation of the Primary School, Shistergam to the status of Middle
Level, pursuant to the instructions/reference of the Chief Education Officer,
Anantnag, vide reference No. CEO/A/SSA/13/3245-47 dated 29th of April,
2013, an advertisement notice came to be issued for engagement of two
teachers on ReT (Rehbar-i-Teleem) pattern, having Math and Science
background on habitation basis. After scrutinizing the applications of the
eligible candidates and also after following due process of selection under
law and as per norms/rules, a panel was framed and submitted to the higher
authority viz. Chief Education Officer, Anantnag/ Respondent No.
5wherein, as per their merit and eligibility, M/S Javaid Ahmad Shah and
Mohammad Umar Ullah Rather/ Petitioner herein secured 1st and 2ndplace,
respectively. Accordingly, the selection list was issued by the office of
Respondent No. 5which was published in the local Daily for the purpose of
Page 4 of 10SWP No. 2143/2015
inviting Objections from the concerned, if any; that, in the meanwhile, Syed
Nazia Jan/ Respondent No. 8 herein called the selection process in question
before this Court through the medium of SWP No. 1068/2013, claiming
therein that she, being permanent resident of the habitation of Shistergam,
be considered for selection. The Petitioner herein objected to the said claim,
by pleading that the Respondent No.8, along with others, are not the
residents of habitation Shistergam. Consequently, upon disposal of the said
Writ Petition by this Court vide Judgment dated 29th of May, 2015, an
enquiry was ordered and conducted through Assistant Commissioner (R),
Anantnag, BDO, Qazigund and ZEO, Qazigund; and that, as a result of
pendency of the said litigation, the selection of ReTs for Upgraded Primary
School to Middle Level, Shistergam remained on hold for a long time and,
in the meanwhile, pursuant to the State Administrative Council decision
read with Government Order No. 919-Edu of 2018 dated 16th of November,
2018, the Government has imposed blanket ban on engagement of ReTs, as
such, Petition under reply has been rendered infructuous, therefore, the
same deserves to be dismissed.
08. The Respondent No.3, in his Objections, has stated that the
factual position of the case is that two posts of ReT at village
Shishtergam were duly advertised by the Education Department vide No.
DIPK-1221 dated 3rd of May, 2013 and the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9
had applied for the said posts in due course of time, regarding which
a Writ Petition bearing SWP No. 1068/2013 came to be filed by the
Respondent Nos.8 and 9. The said Writ Petition, vide Order dated 29th of
May, 2015, came to be disposed of directing the Respondent No.3-Deputy
Commissioner, Anantnag to personally hold an enquiry in the matter, so as
to ascertain and determine whether or not the Petitioners therein/
Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 herein are presently permanent residents of village
Shishtergarn, where the two posts of ReTs were required to be filled in on
habitation basis in the Middle School Shishtergam and the Respondent No.
3 was granted liberty to hear both the parties in respect of their claims as
well as counter claims by way of producing documents or any evidence;
Page 5 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
that before proceeding on spot at village Shishtergam, Tehsil Dooru, in
pursuance of the Judgment passed by this Court, the private Respondents
filed LPA bearing No.79/2015, which came to be dismissed vide Order
dated 9th of July, 2025, with observation that the Deputy Commissioner,
Anantnag shall enquire into the mater without taking into account outcome
of any previous exercise undertaken at a lower level; that in compliance of
the Order passed by the Division Bench, the Respondent No.3-Deputy
Commissioner, Anantnag, accompanied by Respondent No.7-
Tehsildar,Dooru, along with Patwari concerned, visited the spot with
relevant records of village Shishtergam, Tehsil Dooru, where the concerned
parties/ candidates reside and found that Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 herein,
namely, Syed Nazia Jan and Syed Anjum Gazala, are presently residing in
village Shishtergam, as their residential houses are standing upon Survey
No. 280 of estate Shistergam, Tehsil Dooru, which qualifies as a habitation
in terms of Government Order No. 288-Edu of 2009. The enquiry was
conducted in the matter properly and the Order dated 29th of July, 2015
passed in a transparent manner, as such, the Petitioner has got no locus
standi to file the Writ Petition.
09. The Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 have also filed their Objections,
stating therein that against the Order dated 29th of May, 2015 passed by the
Writ Court in SWP No.1068/2013, the Petitioner and one Javid
Ahmad Shah had filed LPA No. 97/2015 before the Division Bench of this
Court, however, the said LPA was dismissed vide Order dated 9th of July,
2015; that, after passing of the aforesaid Order by the Division Bench, the
Respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag summoned all the
concerned parties and provided ample opportunity of putting their
respective cases before it, whereafter, the parties appeared before the
Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag in person as well as through their
Counsel; that, after hearing both the parties, the Deputy Commissioner,
Anantnag, accompanied by Tehsildar and Patwari concerned, visited the
spot on9th of July, 2015, perused the revenue records of village
Shistergam and found that the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 are presently
Page 6 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
residing in their residential houses standing on Survey No.280 situate at
village Shistergam which is a habitation; that the Deputy Commissioner,
Anantnag, thereafter, passed the Order dated 29th of July, 2015, wherein he
returned a finding to the effect that the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9are
residents of habitation Shistergam and they do not reside at Sheikhpora,
because Sheikhpora is not a part of Shistergam, as it is a separate revenue
village known as ‘Gochan’; and that the said Javid AhmadShah has also
filed a Civil Suit for declaration and mandatory injunction with respect to
the subject before the Court of learned Principal District Judge, Anantnag,
who assigned the same to the Court of learned Sub-Judge, Anantnag for its
disposal under law and that the said Suit is still pending disposal before the
trial Court.
10. Mr R. A. Jan, the learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf
of the Petitioner, submitted that the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag/
Respondent No.3, under the influence of a local MLA, had decided the
matter with respect to the residence of the private Respondents herein
wrongly and in a biased manner, overlooking the report of the Committee
of Officers, including the revenue Officers, wherein they had stated that the
private Respondents were, in fact, not the residents of Shishtergam
habitation, whose residents could only be considered as eligible candidates
for their consideration to appointment as ReTs. He argued that the
Committee, in its report, had stated that the private respondents herein were
residents of Survey No. 311 falling in village Sheikhpora, whereas, the
Deputy Commissioner, without any demarcation, merely on the basis of the
statements of some selected persons and the spot inspection, concluded that
they were the residents of Survey No. 280 of village Shistergam. The
learned Senior Counsel has contended that the Deputy Commissioner had
falsely prepared the report just to help the private Respondents, who had not
even applied for the post in question before the cut-off date, but only after
the last date fixed for receipt of the applications. Mr Jan has further argued
that the private Respondents are not even interested in the matter now,
inasmuch as, nobody is present to contest on their behalf, perhaps for the
Page 7 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
reason that they have been selected somewhere else. He has also informed
the Court that the Respondent No.9 has already been selected in the
Department of Law of the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and, as
such, was not interested to defend this case any further.
11. Mr Furqan Yaqoob Sofi, the learned Government Advocate,
appearing on behalf of the official Respondents, while defending the Order
impugned issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag/ Respondent
No.3 herein, submits that since the ReT Scheme has already been revised
by the Government vide Government Order No. 919-Edu of 2018 dated 16th
of November, 2018 and, as such, no panels were saved by the said Order.
12. Heard learned Counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings on
record and considered the matter.
13. The short controversy that is required to be set at rest in this
Petition is with regard to the dispute relating to formulation of the panel for
the ReT Teachers for Government Middle School Shistergam falling under
the educational zone of Qazigund of District Anantnag, whereby the
Petitioner, along with one Javaid Ahmad Shah, who were 10+2 with
subjects of Science and Math, respectively.
14. From the perusal of the pleadings on record, it appears that in
response to an advertisement notice issued by the Zonal Education Officer,
Qazigund on 29th of April, 2013, a panel and, consequently, a select list of
the aforesaid two ReT candidates came to be formulated which was notified
by the Chief Education Officer, Anantnag and published in daily newspaper
Greater Kashmir in its edition dated 3rd of June, 2013. Aggrieved of this
tentative seniority list, the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 herein, namely, Syed
Nazia Jan and Syed Anjum Gazala filed a Writ Petition bearing SWP No.
1068/2013, challenging the tentative select list and this Court, vide
Judgment dated 29th of May, 2015, disposed of the aforesaid Writ Petition
with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag to record a definite
finding of fact as to the residence of the Petitioners therein and forward the
same directly to the Chief Education Officer, Anantnag requiring him to
Page 8 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
take further necessary action pursuant thereto, with a clarification that in the
event the claim of the Petitioners therein is falsified, in that event the Chief
Education Officer will proceed with the select panel and in case the
Petitioners’ claim is established, the candidature of the Petitioners as on 11th
of May, 2013 be considered to draw up a fresh panel on the basis of merit
of the competing candidates as on 14th of May, 2013, the date the earlier
panel was stated to have been drawn.
15. It is further revealed from the record that an intra Court appeal
was filed against the aforesaid Order passed by this Court bearing LPA No.
97/2015, wherein, vide Order dated 9th of July, 2015, it was observed by the
Division Bench that “we, for the reasons discussed, do not feel persuaded to
take a view different from the one taken by the leaned Single Judge. We, as
already stated, expect the Deputy Commissioner to enquire into the matter
without taking into account outcome of any previous exercise undertaken at
a lower level.”
16. In compliance of the Orders passed by this Court in the Writ
Petition as well as the LPA, the Deputy Commissioner proceeded in the
matter and, vide his Order dated 29th of July, 2015, came to the conclusion
that the Petitioners therein/ private Respondents were residents of revenue
village and habitation Shistergam and, in no way, were they residents of
Sheikhpora because Sheikhpora is not a part of Shistergam, but as a
separate revenue village known as Gochan. The Deputy Commissioner,
thus, established the claim of the private Respondents herein and the Chief
Education Officer, Anantnag was directed to implement the orders passed
by this Court.
17. In the light of the aforesaid facts, let us first deal with the
contention raised by the learned Counsel appearing for the official
Respondents that the ReT Scheme had been abolished by the Government
vide Government Order No. 919-Edu of 2018 dated 16th of November, 2018
and, as such, no fresh appointment can be made under the said Scheme,
after the issuance of the aforesaid Government Order. This Contention of
Page 9 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
the learned Counsel for the official Respondents has already been
considered by the Division Bench of this Court in a batch of Writ Petitions
with lead case titled ‘Rukhsana Jabeen v. State of J&K and Ors.’ (SWP
No. 3004/2018), decided on 4th of February, 2023, whereby the Division
Bench had discussed the implications of the Government Order (supra) on
the ReT Scheme already in vogue and the process initiated in compliance
thereto.
18. It will be relevant and profitable to reproduce the operative
portion of the Judgment passed by the Division Bench, at Paragraph No. 31
hereinbelow:
“31. We have heard both the sides at some length on the
impact of the Government order on the pending litigation and
we cull out our conclusion as under:
(i) That the impugned Government order will not affect
the select panels prepared by the respondents which have been
acted upon and formal orders of engagement have been issued;
(ii) That the impugned Government Order will not
override or effect the judgments passed or to be passed by this
Court holding a candidate/candidates entitled to engagement in
the selection process which was/is under challenge before the
Court; 26 SWP No.3004/2018 c/w connected matters;
(iii) Where the select panels are approved and the
aggrieved party has approached the Court before it could be
acted upon, shall also be not affected by the impugned
Government order, in that, but for litigation in the Court, the
approved panel/panels could have been acted upon and formal
letters of engagement in favour of the selected candidates
issued prior to the issuance of the impugned Government order;
and,
(iv) Notwithstanding issuance of the impugned
Government order, the respondents shall abide by the
judgments passed by any competent Court of law which have
attained finality. However, the writ petitions involving
adjudication of disputes in respect of tentative merit lists or
tentative select panels shall be liable to be dismissed in view of
the impugned Government order, in that, it would not be
permissible for a Court of law to direct the respondents to
finalize the tentative merit lists or tentative select panels and
issue engagement orders in view of closure of the scheme and a
clear stipulation contained in paragraph 2ndof the impugned
Government order.”
Page 10 of 10
SWP No. 2143/2015
19. In view of the mandate of the aforesaid Judgment passed by
the Division Bench, the select panels approved under the ReT Scheme had
been saved for further proceedings in the matter, however, the panel, in the
case on hand, was yet to be approved, inasmuch as, it was only the tentative
panel prepared by the concerned authorities that had been published by the
official Respondents and the Chief Education Officer, Anantnag invited
objections from the public at large, therefore, this tentative panel cannot be
stated to have been approved by the authorities, so as to attract condition
No. (iii) of Paragraph No. 31 of the aforesaid Judgment passed by the
Division Bench. In this view of the matter, the present Petition filed by the
Petitioner, in the considered opinion of this Court, has been rendered as
infructuous and does not call for going into the merits of the Order
impugned passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag/ Respondent
No.3 herein, as it will be a futile exercise.
20. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion and observations
made hereinabove, this Writ Petition is, thus, disposed of as having been
rendered infructuous in view of the abolition of the ReT Scheme by the
Government vide Government Order No. 919-Edu of 2018 dated 16th of
November, 2018, as also the interpretation of the said Government Order
rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid Judgment.
21. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of on the above terms,
along with the connected CMs.
(M. A. CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
January 3rd, 2025
“TAHIR”
i. Whether the Judgment is approved for reporting? Yes/No.
Tahir Manzoor Bhat
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this
document