RAJNI SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH the medium of instant petition, the Petitioner seeks quashment of order No. ZEO/S/RT/1181 -82 dated 23.01.2004 (Annexure -C) issued by Zonal Education Officer, Satwari (Respondent No. 5) vide which Parvinder Kour (Respondent No. 7) has been engaged as Rehbar -e -Taleem (hereinafter for short referred to as 'R -e -T') Teacher in Government Primary School Haripur, primarily on the ground that she figures at serial No. l in the merit list (Annexure -A) prepared by Respondent No. 5, whereas private Respondent No. 7 at serial No. 2 and that her name was also approved by the Village Level Education Committee (VLEC), but she has been ignored for appointment and instead Respondent No. 7 was appointed, who was less meritorious.

(2.) PURSUANT to notice, Mrs. Neeru Goswami, learned Dy. Advocate General, had put in appearance on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 6, whereas Mr. K. M. Bhatti, Advocate, had put in appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 7. Since on one date, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner, the instant petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. However, thereafter it was restored and all the Respondents were put to fresh notices. Vide my separate Zimini (short) order of today, Respondent No. 7 has been set ex -parte.

(3.) SINCE a very short controversy has arisen for the consideration of this Court, as to whether the Petitioner deserves to be appointed as R -e -T teacher in Government Primary School Haripur, after she gets married to another village (Revenue Village) and as to how the word 'belong' vis   -vis the 'local candidate' in the R -e -T Scheme is to be understood, learned Counsel for both the sides have consented to the disposal of the petition at this stage itself. Hence, formally admitted.