STATE TIMES NEWS
SRINAGAR: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court comprising Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Sanjay Dhar, while setting-aside judgment of writ court, upheld the engagement/appointment of the appellant as an Education Volunteer, Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher and General Line Teacher. The appellant Shazia Bashir has challenged judgment dated October 30, 2018 passed by Writ Court in SWP No.410/2005 filed by respondent (hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner) whereby the said respondent had challenged the engagement of appellant. Vide impugned judgment and order dated October 30, 2018, the Writ Court has allowed the writ petition and 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.
The Division Bench observed that even 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.
While considering facts of the instant case in light of the aforesaid judicial precedents, the DB observed that we have to bear in mind the fact that the appellant was engaged as an Education Volunteer in 2004 under EGS scheme which has been abandoned. Upon conversion of EGS Centre into a Primary School, appellant’s engagement was converted to Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher, as per relevant scheme. Thereafter in 2014, the appellant came to be appointed as a General Line teacher in aforesaid school. There is no dispute to the fact that the appellant has been engaged as an Education Volunteer and thereafter as Rehbar-e-Taleem teacher and General Line teacher by competent authorities. “We have also held that at the time of making engagement of the appellant as an Education Volunteer, substantial compliance to the guidelines has been made. In these circumstances, the equity tilts heavily in favour of appellant. Her case in equity becomes all the more strong in the light of the fact that the scheme under which the Education Volunteers were engaged has already been abandoned and even if we quash the engagement of the appellant, the writ petitioner cannot be engaged as an Education Volunteer under a scheme which has already been wound up. Thus, even if case of the writ petitioner is accepted, no relief can be granted in her favour and it would amount to issuing a futile writ, which we are not inclined to do,” the Court observed.
DB further observed that apart from above, having served for many years, the appellant may have by now become over-age and her family may be dependent upon her earnings. The Court observed, “If her engagement is quashed at this point of time, she will have no other place to go and quashment of her engagement will work very harshly against her dependents. As against this, the writ petitioner, admittedly, is working as an Anganwadi Worker and she cannot be appointed as an Education Volunteer as of now. Therefore, balance of equity tilts heavily in favour of appellant. This aspect of the case has been totally ignored by the learned Writ Court while passing impugned judgment.” With these observations Division Bench allowed the appeal and set-aside the judgment passed by Writ Court and ordered that the engagement/ appointment of appellant as an Education Volunteer, Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher and General Line Teacher is upheld.