Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 488 (JK)

Meenakshi Sharma v. State

2018-07-10

SANJEEV KUMAR

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. Respondent No.3 vide Advertisement notice No.CEOU/SSA/3498-3512 dated 21.05.2010 invited applications from the eligible candidates for engagement as ReTs in various schools of District Udhampur. Amongst the posts notified for the engagement as ReTs in District Udhampur, one post of ReT in Government Middle School Jandrari of revenue village Thaplal, Zone Ramnagar had been notified. The subsequent notification was also issued to fill up two posts of ReTs in Primary School Upper Go-to-thill falling in the same Revenue village i.e Thaplal. The petitioner claims that he responded to both the aforesaid Advertisement notifications. Accordingly, two separate panels were prepared by respondent No.4. The petitioner claims that he was placed at S.No.1 in both the panels because of her merit and was, therefore, entitled to be selected and engaged as ReT. Accordingly, the panel for the Middle School Jandrari was finalized by respondent No.4 and the same was forwarded by respondent No.4 to respondent No.2 for approval through proper channel. It is submitted that pursuant to the approval granted by respondent No.2 vide order No.DSEJ/RET/S/3093 dated 27.06.2013, respondent No.4 vide order No.ZEO/R//SSA/847-49 dated 08.07.2013 issued the order of engagement in favour of the petitioner as ReT in Government Middle School Jandrari. It is further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid order of engagement issued by respondent No.4, the petitioner submitted her joining report in the Government Middle School Jandrari on the same day. It is claimed that since then she has been continuously performing her duties in the aforesaid school. 2. Grievance of the petitioner as projected in this petition, however, is that without there being any reason or justification, respondent No.4 issued another order bearing No.ZEO/R/SSA/3473-74 dated 18.11.2013 once again engaging the petitioner as ReT in Government Middle School Jandrari. This order too had a reference to some approval granted by respondent No.2 vide order No.DSEJ/RET/8692 dated 08.11.2013. The petitioner has, however, admitted that pursuant to the aforesaid order, she submitted her joining report once again. It is claimed that the petitioner is entitled to the salary and other benefits flowing from the order dated 08.11.2013 and not the subsequent order issued by respondent No.4 dated 18.07.2013. It is also urged that despite the fact that the petitioner has performed his duties in the school in question w.e.f 08.07.2013 to 18.11.2013, her salary has not been released for the aforesaid period. 3. It is also urged that despite the fact that the petitioner has performed his duties in the school in question w.e.f 08.07.2013 to 18.11.2013, her salary has not been released for the aforesaid period. 3. On being put on notice, the respondents have filed their objections. The respondents have sought to justify the subsequent order issued by respondent No.4 dated 18.11.2013 on the ground that the earlier order issued by respondent No.4 dated 08.07.2013 was without the approval of respondent No.2. It is submitted that respondent No.2 vide order No.DSEJ/RET/S/3093 dated 27.06.2013 directed respondent No.3 to submit tentative ReT Panel of Primary School Upper Go to thill after it is displayed in the concerned revenue village. In the aforesaid background, it has been pleaded that there was a reference to the case of the petitioner also which had been considered by respondent No.2 for her engagement as ReT in Government Middle School Jandrari. It is, thus, submitted that earlier order passed by respondent No.4 on 08.07.2013 was illegal and, therefore, not sustainable in the eyes of law. The second order, was, however issued after the approval to the engagement of the petitioner was granted by respondent No.2 on 18.11.2013. It is, thus, submitted that it is the second order which is valid one and has rightly been given effect to. It is also pleaded that since the subsequent order issued on 18.11.2013 has been complied with by the petitioner who submitted fresh joining report in compliance thereto, as such, the petitioner cannot be heard raising grievance against the aforesaid order. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I find that the order passed by respondent No.4 on 08.07.2013 was without formal approval granted by respondent No.2. Respondent No.4 in the order dated 08.07.2013 has referred to the communication of respondent No.2 bearing No.DSEK/RET/S/3093 dated 27.06.2013 as approval granted by respondent No.2, whereas on perusal whereof, it transpires that the same was not formal approval of engagement of the petitioner, rather a communication to respondent No.3 to submit the tentative panel of the other school i.e Primary school Go-to-thill. There is, however, mention of the petitioner in the aforesaid communication. For facility of reference, the communication aforesaid, which has been placed on record by Mr. Gupta, learned AAG during the course of hearing, is reproduced hereunder:. There is, however, mention of the petitioner in the aforesaid communication. For facility of reference, the communication aforesaid, which has been placed on record by Mr. Gupta, learned AAG during the course of hearing, is reproduced hereunder:. “Government of Jammu and Kashmir” DIRECTORATE OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, JAMMU To The Chief Education Officer, Udhampur. No.DSEJ/RET/S/3093 Dated 27.06.2013 Sub: RET Panel of PS Upper Go to thill of Zone Ramngar. Please refer to the subject cited above in this context you are inform that Meenakshi Sharma w/o Sudesh Kumar R/o Thaplal B.Sc B.Ed. has been considered for her engagement as ReT in GMS Jandrari as per your recommendation as well as under Govt Order 1503-Edu of 2003 dated 01.10.2003. As such you are asked to submit tentative RET Panel of PS Upper go to thill of meritorious candidates after display in the concerned revenue village in order to finalize the selection process. Joint Director Directorate of School Education Jammu” 5. It is, thus, seen that the formal approval for the engagement of petitioner was granted by respondent No.2 vide order dated 8.11.2013 and consequently the order of engagement in favour of petitioner was issued by respondent No.4 on 18.11.2013. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it was the order dated 18.11.2013 which was required to be given effect to and not the order passed on 08.07.2013. More-so, when the latter order dated 18.11.2013 has been accepted by the petitioner by submitting her fresh joining report in compliance thereto. 6. Be that as it may, the fact remains that in terms of order issued on 8.07.2013, the petitioner has performed her duties continuously in the school aforesaid and has, therefore, become entitled to receive the salary for the aforesaid period. The respondents have not brought anything on record to show that there was any connivance between respondent No.4 and the petitioner or that in the issuance of order dated 8.7.2013, the petitioner was, in any way, party or privy. That being so, the petitioner cannot be denied salary for the aforesaid period. 7. The only question to be seen is who shall pay the salary to the petitioner. Obviously, it is respondent No.4 Zonal Education Officer, Ramnagar, who without waiting for the formal approval, hurriedly issued order of engagement in favour of petitioner on 8.7.2013 and even permitted the petitioner to work for almost four months. 8. 7. The only question to be seen is who shall pay the salary to the petitioner. Obviously, it is respondent No.4 Zonal Education Officer, Ramnagar, who without waiting for the formal approval, hurriedly issued order of engagement in favour of petitioner on 8.7.2013 and even permitted the petitioner to work for almost four months. 8. Keeping in view the totality of circumstances of this case and the discussion made here-in-above, this petition is disposed of by providing that the petitioner shall be entitled to receive salary for the period from 08.07.2013 to 18.11.2013 i.e, the period for which she has performed her duties. The respondents shall immediately and forthwith release the salary for the aforesaid period in favour of the petitioner. On payment of salary to the petitioner for the aforesaid period, the State shall be at liberty to recover the same from respondent No.4 after providing the latter an opportunity of being heard. It is made clear that appointment of the petitioner shall take effect from 18.11.2013 for all other purposes. 9. Disposed of as above.