SHAMSHER ALI AND ANR. v. STATE TH.EDUCATION DEPTT.AND ORS.
Court: High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir judgment dated 2024-11-20. SHAMSHER ALI AND ANR. v. STATE TH.EDUCATION DEPTT.AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
Regular List Serial Nos. 12 & 13 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CM No. 1712/2026 & CM No. 1713/2026 In SWP No. 1732/2014 Shamsher Ali & Anr. ….. Applicants/Petitioners Through: Mr. Achal Sharma, Advocate. Vs State of J&K & Ors. . …. Non-applicants/Respondents Through: CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE ORDER (15. 04. 2026) 01. Vide advertisement No. CEO/D/SSA/129972-79 dated 08. 02. 2014, Zonal Education Officer (ZEO), Bhaderwah had undertaken selection exercise for engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) in newly upgraded School, Zone Bhaderwah, Panchayat Ghatha. 02. The name of the School for which the engagement of three candidates was Upper Primary School, Lagsroo and the three posts were in the discipline of Math/Science, Hindi/Urdu & Social Studies. CM No. 1712/2026 & CM No. 1713/2026 In SWP No. 1732/2014 03. The selection exercise resulted in preparation of merit list of fifteen persons.
The petitioners did not figure in said merit list for the reason being that their applications were not entertained for the purpose of consideration and that is the reason for the petitioners making prayer in the writ petition for a mandamus unto the respondent No. 4 i. e. , Zonal Education Officer (ZEO), Bhaderwah to consider the application forms of the petitioners on account of the fact that the petitioners were physically and actually residing in village Ghatha housing Upper Primary School, Lagsroo. 04. The two petitioners, namely, Shamher Ali and Raheela Tabassum came forward with the writ petition filed on 04. 07. 2014. 05. By virtue of an order dated 08. 07. 2014, this Court stayed selection process for three posts as envisaged under advertisement notice (supra). 06. The writ petition remained pending all along before this Court came to modify interim order dated 08. 07. 2014 by virtue of an order dated 05. 06.
2015 while letting the writ-respondents to fill up the posts of ReT in Science stream by considering the case of intervener Monika Sharma along with other eligibles. 07. The writ petition came to suffer dismissal for non-prosecution in terms of order dated 20. 11. 2024 for seeking restoration of which only one of two writ petitioners, namely, CM No. 1712/2026 & CM No. 1713/2026 In SWP No. 1732/2014 Raheela Tabassum has come forward with a time barred restoration application-CM No. 1713/2026 accompanied with application-CM No. 1712/2026 for condonation of delay of 459 days. 08. The cause setup for the delay is that the dismissal of the writ petition was not known to the petitioners and they came to know about the same recently and immediately acted to come forward with the applications. 09.
This Court is not in a position to understand the context of “recently and immediately” and, therefore, the same would not constitute a sufficient cause even for the sake of putting the non-applicants/writ-respondents to notice and, therefore, both the applications warrant dismissal and are, accordingly, dismissed. (RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE JAMMU 15. 04. 2026 Bunty Bunty Kumar 2026. 04. 16 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.