Jammu, Could 20: In compliance to 0.A. No.319/2025 titled Ranjit Kumar V/s UT of J&Okay & Ors. Director, Faculty Schooling Jammu directed CEO to permit ReT to hitch on his place of posting.
Particulars with Cross City Information learn as underneath:-
Whereas, the applicant particularly Ranjit Kumar has approached the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench by the use of submitting O.A. No. 319/2025 titled Ranjit Kumar V/s U.T. of J&Okay and Others, searching for route to permit him to hitch again and resume his duties as Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) Instructor and to settle the intervening interval of absence as effectively; and
Whereas, the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench vide order dated 20-03-2025, has been happy to get rid of the aforementioned Authentic Utility with the next instructions:-
“Respondent No. 3 is directed to accord consideration to the case of the applicant for rejoining the applicant and resuming his duties as RET and in addition settle the intervening interval of absence, protecting in view the medical situation of the applicant. Respondents shall go a reasoned and talking order inside a interval of six weeks from the date of receipt of licensed copy of this order.”
Whereas, the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur vide communication No. CEOuthegal/13430 dated 06-06-2025 has reported that the applicant was engaged as ReT Instructor in Major Faculty, Sansar, Zone Panchari vide Order No.ZEoff/RET/SSA/2642-44 dated 19-02-2015 and joined his duties on 09-03- 2015, who was later deployed at Major Faculty, Nowara for the interval from 10-04-2016 to 30-11-2016.
Thereafter, he was relieved with instructions to rejoin his unique place of posting. However, as a substitute of becoming a member of, the applicant had utilized for medical depart and remained unauthorized absent for greater than 07 years.
In view of the aforesaid information, the declare of the applicant got here to be thought of and rejected by the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur vide Order issued underneath endorsement No. CEOU/Authorized/26343-46 dated 01 -08-2025; and
Whereas, pursuant to the identical, the applicant has submitted a illustration earlier than the authorities, contending that his medical situation and the supporting information weren’t duly thought of by the CEO, Udhampur, whereas rejecting his case.
He additional submits that he had utilized for medical depart attributable to extreme well being points, nonetheless, the stated depart was neither sanctioned nor rejected with causes and no termination order had been issued in opposition to him previous to submitting his rejoining software; and
Whereas, primarily based on the stated representations, the matter was re-examined and vide this workplace communication No. DSEJ/Authorized/(C.No. 7669782)/52470-71 dated 29.10.2025, the next clarifications have been sought from the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur:-
i. Whether or not any discover for resumption of duties or taking motion in opposition to the applicant for his unauthorized absence has been issued by the authorities involved and the acknowledgement of the stated discover if any by the applicant. ii. Whether or not any departmental motion within the matter has been taken in opposition to the applicant or the matter has been taken up with the upper authorities on this regard. iii. Present the authentication of the medical certificates/ kind 4 submitted by the applicant from the issuing authority.
Whereas, in response to the stated letter, the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur, vide letter dated 20-11 -2025, submitted {that a} detailed report was sought from the Zonal Schooling Officer. Panchari, vide workplace letter dated 01-11-2025, who vide letter No. ZEOP/1685 dated 12-11- 2025 reported that the applicant, pursuant to submitting his re-joining as ReT, at Major Faculty, Sansar, had utilized for depart w.e.f. 01-03-2017 onwards and as per official information, no discover for resumption of duties had been served to the applicant.
Being attentive to the stated infirmity together with the medical certificates submitted by the applicant and contemplating the totality of information and circumstances of the case, the matter was referred to the Administrative Division, who vide communication dated 16-02-2026 has conveyed the next recommendation:-
“Returned: As per the subject material of the case pertains to ReT, the identical is effectively throughout the competence of the Directorate of Faculty Schooling, being HOD/ Competent Authority for the aim, which can take a thought of view within the matter as per the related guidelines and go a talking order accordingly.”
Whereas, as per the accessible information and the most recent report dated 20.11.2025 submitted by the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur, which relies on the report of the Zonal Schooling Officer, Panchari, the applicant was initially appointed as a ReT vide Director Faculty Schooling, Jammu Order No. DSEJRET/2532 dated 14.02.2015 adopted by Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur Order No CEOU/SSA/29667-71 dated 16.02.2015 and ZEO Panchari Order No. ZEoff/RET/SSA/2642-44 dated 19.02.2015, and joined the college on 09.03.2015. Thereafter, he was deployed to PS Nowara vide Order No. ZEOPP/P/454-55 dated 16.04.2016 and attended Major Faculty, Nowara from19.04.2016 to30.11.2016,from the place he was relieved to hitch his unique place of posting and as a substitute of becoming a member of his unique place of engagement/posting, he utilized for depart on 01.03.2017. Nevertheless, no report is out there within the workplace of the ZEO to point that any present trigger discover was issued or that any alternative of listening to was supplied to the applicant with regard to his subsequent absence; and
Whereas, when it comes to Authorities Order No. 230-Edu of 2007 dated 27- 06-2007, Rehbar-elTaleem Lecturers are entitled to sanctioned depart, together with depart with out honorarium on account of great sickness, and such depart shall not represent a break in steady engagement. Additional Rule-5 of the J&Okay Depart of Absence to Rehbar-e-Taleem Guidelines, 2007, clearly mandates that no antagonistic motion, together with termination, shall be taken with out affording an inexpensive alternative of being heard, and whereas, within the current case, the admitted absence of any discover or alternative of listening to renders any antagonistic presumption legally unsustainable; and
Whereas, as per Article 128 of the J&Okay Civil Providers Rules, which governs circumstances of overstaying of depart or absence with out depart, there isn’t any provision for automated termination of service and the stated Article incorporates the rules of pure justice by requiring due consideration of the circumstances resulting in such absence and whereas, in circumstances the place the absence is on account of sick well being, the availability requires submission of a certificatefromaMedicalOfficerandnotthatofMedicalBoardasreliedbythe CEO, Udhampur, and
Whereas, in any other case additionally, extended absence can’t by itself be handled as abandonmentofservicewithoutfollowingrequiredproceduressuchasissuinga present trigger discover and giving a possibility of listening to, which weren’t adopted on this case and due to this fact, the rejection order issued by the CEO Udhampur is procedurally mistaken and in opposition to pure justice and having been handed with out following the mandate of Article 128 of the J&Okay Civil Providers Rules in its true sprit; and
Whereas, it’s additional noticed that there was administrative inaction and delay on the a part of the involved authorities/officers in neither deciding the depart software of the applicant nor initiating well timed and applicable motion concerning the candidates resumption of duties, which can’t be attributed to the applicant.
It’s a settled precept of legislation that an worker can’t be made to undergo on account of lapses or omissions on the a part of the authorities, notably the place the worker has acted bonaflde and submitted related materials similar to medical information in help of his declare
Now, due to this fact, in view of the above information and circumstances and in compliance with the order dated 20.03.2025 handed by the Hon’tle Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 319/2025 titled Ranjit Kumar V/s. U.T. of J&Okay and Others, adopted by the directions obtained from the Administrative Division vide communication No. Edu-LGLOJmu(CAT)/2023/2025-01 (7664537) dated 16.02 2026, the case of the applicant has been reconsidered.
Upon such reconsideration, it has been noticed that the rejection order issued by the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur, is just not in consonance with the information and circumstances of the case nor with the mandate of the principles governing the sector.
Accordingly, the Chief Schooling Officer, Udhampur, is hereby directed to allow the applicant to renew his duties as a Rehbar-e-Taleem Instructor at his unique place of posting i.e., Major Faculty, Sansar, Zone Panchari.
The interval of absence of applicat from 01.03.2017 to 03.11.2024 shall be handled as dies non, with out prejudice to the candidates entitlement to depart, if any, due in terns of Authorities Order No. 230-Edu of 2007 dated 27.06.2007 and the interval from 04.1 1.2024 onwards shall be handled as on obligation on a notional foundation, solely for the restricted objective of reckoning qualifying service for regularization, with none monetary implications or financial advantages for the stated interval.
