news details |
|
|
| Marriage outside village entails rejection for ReT post; petition dismissed | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Jan 22: Vacation Judge of J&K High Court Jammu Wing Justice Sanjeev Kumar pronounced a judgment and dismissed a writ petition in ReT case filed by petitioner Sonia Sharma against the State of J&K now Union Territory.
The petitioner was represented by SurinderKour, Sr Advocate with ManpreetKour Advocate and the State of J&K now UT was represented by AseemSawhney AAG, while as G S Thakur appeared for the private respondent. Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed that the petitioner is aggrieved of an order whereby respondent No 6 has been engaged as ReT in the upgraded Middle School, Shahpur. The petitioner in this petition seeks a direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to offer her appointment as ReT in the aforesaid School in place of respondent No.6.
Sonia Sharma being submitted that she is a resident of village ShahpurManyalan, is eligible to be engaged as ReT in Math stream in the upgraded Middle School, Shahpur. She submitted that her claim for appointment as ReT has been rejected by respondent Nos. 1 to 5 primarily on the ground that, at the time of issuance of Advertisement Notification dated 25.4.2009, she was married outside the village ShahpurManyalan and, therefore, ceased to be the resident of the said village. She further submits that it is true that, at the time of issuance of the Advertisement Notification aforesaid, she was married outside the village aforesaid, but claims that even after her marriage, she continued to remain with her parents in village ShahpurManyalan as she was adopted by her father after marriage. AseemSawhney Addl. Advocate General J&K in response to the averments made in the writ petition,submitted that in response to the applications invited for two posts of ReTs, one each in Math and Science stream available in the aforesaid School, the petitioner as well as respondent No 6 submitted their application forms and sought consideration in the Math stream. Initially, it is pleaded, the petitioner was placed at SNo 1 in the merit panel for the post of ReT in Math stream, but her placement in the panel was objected to by respondent No 6 on the ground that the petitioner having married to one Atinder Kumar Sharma, a resident of village PathanmohraDassal, a different revenue village, had ceased to be the resident of village Shahpur. The petitioner was asked to produce PRC certificate of her husband, but she failed to do so. It is submitted that on consideration by the Village Education Committee, the application of the petitioner was rejected and the candidate next in the order of merit i.e, respondent No 6, who was admittedly a resident of village ShahpurManyalan, was placed in the merit panel. She being the candidate with highest merit available in the village concerned was offered the appointment. It was also brought to the notice of this Court that during the pendency of this writ petition, on completion of five years’ service as ReT, respondent No 6 has since been regularized as General Line Teacher. To the similar effect is the reply of respondent No 6. The Court held " I am of the view that the plea of the petitioner that even after her marriage to Atinder Kumar Sharma, a resident of a different revenue village, she continued to stay with her parents and was, thus, a resident of village ShahpurManyalan at the time of issuance of Advertisement Notification aforesaid is not substantiated by any evidence. With a view to substantiate her assertion, the petitioner has relied upon several documents, but all prepared after the issuance of the Advertisement Notification. It may be noted that the Advertisement Notification in question was issued by the CEO Rajouri on 25.4.2009 and there is not even a single document placed on record by the petitioner which indicates her residence even after marriage in the village ShahpurManyalan. The documents, which have been placed on record by the petitioner, are all generated after the issuance of Advertisement Notification and obviously, to put forth the claim against the post notified for the upgraded Middle School Shahpur. "
Court further observed that from the perusal of the objections filed by respondent No.6 and the annexures appended theReTo, it is abundantly clear that the petitioner, after her marriage with one Atinder Kumar Sharma, has taken up residence in the village Pathanmorha since the year 2007. A copy of first page of the service book of the father of the petitioner placed on record by respondent No 6 reveals that the father of the petitioner has indicated his residence in W.No.10, Rajouri. When did he shift from Rajouri to Village Shahpur is also not forthcoming from the record. Be that as it may, from the perusal of documents placed on record, it is clearly demonstrated that the petitioner, who might have been a resident of village Shahpur, shifted to village Pathanmorha after she got married to one Atinder Kumar Sharma in the year 2007. The story projected by the petitioner that even after her marriage, she continued to remain with her parents in village ShahpurManyalan as she was adopted by her father is not supported by any cogent documentary evidence. High Court after making these observations dismissed the writ petition. JNF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
