RAMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF J AND K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of learned Counsel for both the sides, we intend to dispose of the instant Letters Patent Appeal at motion stage itself. Writ Court record is also available for our perusal.

(2.) Through the instant appeal the Appellant, who got an appointment as Rehbar-e-Taleem (R-e-T) Teacher in Primary School Sharni in year 2000, has questioned the legality of the order dated 01.09.2008 (Annexure-A) of learned Single Judge whereby his appointment stands quashed and private Respondent No. 7 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'writ Petitioner') has been appointed as R-e-T Teacher for the said school. All consequential benefits flowing from the said appointment have also been granted to the writ Petitioner. The impugned order stands implemented, as a result, Appellant has lost his job and the writ Petitioner has been appointed.

(3.) It needs to be mentioned here that the Appellant did not contest the writ petition before the learned Writ Court, so set ex-parte. However, his services were regularized in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme and he came to be appointed/as General Line Teacher substantively for the said school during the pendency of the lis in the month of November, 2005 after putting in five years of service.