SAFYA HAIDER LONE Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Selection and engagement of Ruheena Banoo, Shahnaza Banoo and Zareefa Banoo-respondent Nos. 6 to 8, in these two Writ Petitions, on Rehbar-e-Taleem pattern in Kastoorba Gandhi Balika Vidhalaya (KGBV), on contractual basis, has been questioned by the petitioners on the grounds that breaching the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, the respondents had acted arbitrarily in raising the maximum age limit for the candidates belonging to the reserved category of Resident of Backward Area to 40 years as against 37 years, fixed earlier, and that the selection of the respondents, being against the provisions of the Scheme was unsustainable, in that, belonging to the Village other than the one where Kastoorba Gandhi Balika Vidhalaya was located, they were not entitled to Selection.

(2.) The State-respondents have justified the selection and engagement of the respondents in their Response to the Writ Petition saying that the Kastoorba Gandhi Balika Vidhalaya (KGBV) Scheme contemplated selection of female candidates from respective Education Zones and not from the Revenue Village where the School was located. According to them, the selection of the respondents had been made strictly in accordance with the Scheme.

(3.) Issuance of Corrigendum No.CEO/K/09/1136-40 dated 22.05.2009 to Advertisement Notice No. CEO/ SSA/89/ 755-58 dated 16.02.2009 is justified by stating that the maximum age of the candidates belonging to the reserved category of Resident of Backward Area had been enhanced in view of the issuance of Government Order No.559-GAD of 2008 dated 23.04.2008, whereby the Government in the General Administration Department had enhanced the maximum age limit in case of candidates belonging to Socially and Educationally Backward Classes viz. Weak and Under Privileged Classes (Social Castes), Resident of Areas Adjoining Line of Actual Control (ALC) & Resident of Backward Areas (RBA).