J&K High Court: ReT Teachers’ 5-Year Pre-Regularisation Service Won’t Count for Seniority

The High Court of J&K and Ladakh Friday ruled that the five years of service rendered by Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) teachers before regularisation shall not count for the purpose of fixing their seniority.

Join Us On whatsApp For Latest Developments

A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar while allowing two appeals by the aggrieved General Line Teachers, set aside a single judgeís verdict which held that that there was nothing wrong in the government taking a policy decision to confer the benefit of seniority upon the ReTs on their regularisation with effect from the date they were initially engaged.ìAs a consequence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned provisio, to the extent it provides that the five years service rendered by ReT teachers before regularisation shall count for the purpose of fixing their seniority is set aside,î the Division Bench said while allowing the appeals against the single benchís decision.

The government vide an order on April 28, 2000, launched ReT Scheme which provided for engagement of Teaching Guide (ReT) to perform the teaching duties in the schools facing deficiency of teaching staff.

The ReT was to be engaged initially for a period of two years which was extendable for a period of a further three years subject to satisfactory performance of the ReT.

The ReT was entitled to a monthly honorarium of Rs 1500 for the first two years and Rs 2000 per month from the third year onwards.

There was also a stipulation in the government order with regard to regularisation, providing that on satisfactory completion of five years as ReT on honorarium basis, the candidate would be eligible for appointment as General Line Teacher in the School Education Department.

On June 19, 2014, a policy decision was taken by the government and decided to add a proviso to the last para captioned ìregularisationî of the ReT Scheme to provide that five years service rendered by the ReT before his or her regularisation shall count for the purposes of fixing seniority and pensionary benefits.

It was further provided that the services of the ReTs shall be transferable after regularisation within the district to which they belong.

This proviso was added to the scheme vide government order on June 25, 2014.

It was this proviso that was challenged by the appellants with the contention that the same impacted the seniority of the General Line Teachers appointed in the School Education Department on the recommendations of the Jammu and Kashmir Service Selection Board (JKSSB) on different dates.

In its decision in response to the appeals, the Division Bench held that there is ample authority on the proposition that no employee could be given seniority from the date he was not borne on the service, class, category, or grade as the case may be.

Advocate Tasaduq H Khawja, counsel appearing for the appellants placed reliance on J&K Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956, and the J&K Jammu and Kashmir Educational (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979, besides judgments in support of his contention.

ìReT becomes a member of service only when there is a formal order of appointment issued after evaluation and assessment of his or her performance on completion of five years as ReT,î the court said. ìThe government, acting in ignorance of the settled legal position, took the policy decision to confer the benefit of seniority on ReT with effect from the date they were initially engaged, notwithstanding the fact that on said date they were not borne on the cadre of service constituted by the Rule of 1979.î

The court underscored that the government also did not take into consideration the fact that by adding the impugned proviso in the ReT, they had acted to the serious prejudice of the General Line Teachers who were appointed prior to the regularisation of various ReTs. The court pointed out that the single bench appeared to have been greatly swayed by extension of certain welfare provisions to the ReTs from time to time and erroneously concluded that the government itself had been treating the ReTs on a par with the General Line Teachers.