SHARDA DEVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State Government vide Govt. order No. 396 of Edu 2000 dated 28.4.2000 accorded sanction to a scheme called Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'Scheme') intended to make up the deficiency of staff at the elementary level of education. The objectives of scheme were to promote decentralized management of elementary education with the community participation and involvement, to ensure accountability and responsiveness through community supervision and to operationalize effectively the schooling system at the grass root level. The Scheme provided for services of teaching guides called Rehbar-e-Taleem with a role for them to act as a catalyst for quality education and to ensure overall development of the personality of the children. The ultimate aim of the Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme was to secure universal enrolment and to check out the school drop-outs. The aforementioned Govt. Order is comprehensive self contained and takes care of all aspects of the Scheme including the role of village level committees, the eligibility for the teaching guides or Rehbar-e-Taleem proposed to be recruited, their mode of selection, the honorarium to be paid to them and their regularization on their satisfactorily completing five years period on honorarium basis.

(2.) Zonal Education Officer, Zone Billawar-respondent No. 4 vide notice dated 28.8.2001 invited applications from eligible candidates through respective village level committees for the Rehbar-e-Taleem vacancies available in different primary and middle schools of zone Billawar. The advertisement notice reproduced the eligibility criteria for the advertised vacancies in consonance with the Scheme identified the schools/villages were vacancies were available and gave the timeframe within which the applications were to be submitted. The annexure to the advertisement notice serialized the schools as also the number of vacancies therein proposed to be filled up.

(3.) The petitioners claim to have submitted applications for the engagement as Rehbar-e-Taleem in Middle School Niali and Middle School Dhamlar respectively. However, the petitioners did not find place in the selection list issued by the respondent No.3. Shri Ranjeet Singh S/o Charan Singh R/o Dhamlar-re-spondent No.5 herein was selected for Middle School Raper village Dhamlar whereas Bushan Kumar S/o Ishwar Dass also resident of Dhamlar-respondent No.6 herein was selected as Rehbar-e-Taleem for Middle School Niali. The petitioners, aggrieved by their non-inclusion in the select list and consequent appointment, have assailed the appointment of respondents 5 and 6 as Rehbar-e-Taleem made by respondent No.3 and sought its quashment. The petitioners also seek a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioners against the vacancies to be available after the appointment of respondents 5 and 6 is set-aside. The petitioners edifice the writ petition on the grounds that though the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.5 belong to the same Morah (Locality) and having regard to their place of residence were equally placed to compete for the vacancy of Rehbar-e-Taleem in Middle School Niali, yet the petitioner No.1 had a superior right to be appointed against the available vacancy as against the respondent No 5. on the ground that the petitioner No.1 had better academic qualification as against the respondent No.5. It is pleaded that the petitioner No.1 has done her graduation in Arts (B.A.) as also in Education (B.Ed) and thus had an edge over the claim of respondent No.5 to the vacancy who according to the petitioner No.1 had only done Masters in Urdu. The comparative merit and technical qualification, according to the petitioner No.1 made her a better candidate for the aforesaid vacancy. The respondents are said to have ignored the better academic qualification of the petitioner No.1 and also the directions of this court in Balwinder Kour's case. A good teacher, it is averred, is backbone of society and a technically qualified person being well equipped to work as a teacher has a preferential right to be considered for appointment as Rehbar-e-Taleem as against a candidate having no technical qualification. The respondents are alleged to have acted arbitrarily and illegally while ignoring the petitioner No.1 and selecting respondent No.5 to man the post.