Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, May 2: High Court has expressed displeasure over placement of 20 Principals of School Education Department as Incharge Chief Education Officers despite restraint order passed in the month of September last year.
In its order dated September 5, 2018 in a case titled Gulzar Hussain Versus State of J&K and Others, the High Court had directed that promotions /placements as Chief Education Officers shall defer till the case of the petitioner for his regularization as Principal 10+2 is considered by the Education Department in terms of the judgment dated January 22, 2015.
After hearing Advocate Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed appearing for the petitioner Gulzar Hussain presently posted as District Education Planning Officer Rajouri whereas AAG Ravinder Gupta appearing for Education Department, Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, “before I proceed to frame a formal Robkar, I deem it appropriate to give one more opportunity of three weeks to the respondents to come up with the compliance of the judgment”.
“The respondents should either place on record the order of regularization of the petitioner as Principal 10+2 or take remedial measures as may be required to see that the directions passed by this court are complied with in letter and spirit”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar said, adding “in case of failure, the Commissioner Secretary to Government, School Education Department shall appear in person on the next date of hearing”.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar further observed, “this court had categorically directed the respondents not to make any promotion / placement as In-charge CEO till the matter with regard to regularization of the petitioner as Lecturer 10+2 in terms of the judgment dated January 22, 2015 is concerned. This is a clear case of contempt.”
On this, AAG Ravinder Gupta submitted, “the Education Department is in the process of implementing the directions of the court, however, the matter is required to be placed before the DPC constituted by the GAD”. On the other hand, Advocate Ahmed vehemently argued that rule be framed against the erring Administrative Secretary who dared to violate the directions passed by this court.
Follow our WhatsApp channel