news details |
|
|
| DB expresses concern over ambiguities in ReT | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Apr 30: A Division Bench of State High Court comprising acting Chief Justice Ramlingam Sudhkara and Justice Sanjeev Kumar expressed concern over ambiguities in Rehbar-e-Taleem and asked state to implement National Litigation Policy.
While dismissing case, Division Bench observed that before parting, we would like to point out that Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme which was promulgated by the Government Order No.396-Edu of 2000 dated 28.04.2000 has generated unnecessary litigation and it is more because of the ambiguity created by the official respondents by issuing Government orders and circulars to supplement the Scheme from time to time.
DB further observed that in the original Scheme the Unit of selection was "Village". In other words, a candidate to be eligible to apply for the post of Rehbar-e-Taleem in a school ought to be a person belonging to the village. In all reasonableness and logic, the term "village" as used in the Scheme promulgated vide Government Order dated 28.04.2000(supra) should have been understood as "Revenue Village" as defined in the land Revenue Laws more particularly the Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act, 1996.
DB further observed that one fails to understand as to when the government had restricted the unit of consideration to the village where there was assessed deficiency of staff in the school, where was the necessity to further reduce it to the habitation. DB further observed that the Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme which restricts zone of consideration to the village definitely compromises the merit of the candidates and deprive the schools of the best talent to teach the students. No doubt, the Scheme was promulgated to achieve certain objects, though at the cost of merit.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that there is dire need to give a fresh look to the Government order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009 and consider the feasibility of keeping the revenue village as a unit for consideration of the eligible candidates. This would introduce clarity in the Scheme and would avoid unnecessary litigation, DB said.
DB further observed that the authorities at the helm of affairs should take note of the observations made hereinabove and take appropriate remedial measures to bring clarity in the scheme which in turn, avoid unnecessary and uncalled for litigation in the Courts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
