Only candidates in Directorate-approved ReT select panels retain engagement rights after scheme closure.

The petitioner sought consideration of her representation dated 23.07.2026 for engagement as a Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) teacher at New Primary School, Hariwala Bawa, Village Trigam, Zone Khari, District Ramban.

The selection process was initiated through Advertisement Notice No. CEO/R/12/5173-82 dated 27.08.2012. A revenue-village-level panel was prepared, in which the petitioner was placed at Serial No. 3.

Earlier, in SWP No. 1324/2013, the Court directed a factual enquiry into whether the relevant habitation satisfied the requirements under the Explanation to Government Order No. 288-Edu. dated 08.04.2009.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Banihal, thereafter reported on 14.07.2017 that Hariwala, Hill and Haran constituted isolated habitations, having regard to their geographical contiguity, physical isolation, terrain and population.

The petitioner asserted that she had continuously pursued her candidature, that candidates placed at Serial Nos. 1 and 2 had already been engaged, and that vacancies remained available.

The respondents, however, had not completed the selection process or issued an engagement order to the petitioner.

Whether the petitioner, whose name appeared in the tentative panel for ReT engagement, retained an enforceable right to appointment after the closure of the ReT Scheme?

Whether the petitioner was entitled to consideration for engagement under the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Union Territory of J&K v. Saba Wani?

Whether the petitioner’s name appeared in a select panel approved by the Directorate of Education, so as to preserve her right to engagement despite closure of the ReT Scheme?

The Court considered Government Order No. 288-Edu. dated 08.04.2009, including the Explanation prescribing the requirements for treating a habitation as isolated for purposes of ReT engagement.

It also applied Government Order No. 919-Edu. of 2018 dated 16.11.2018, under which the Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme was closed.

Relying on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Union Territory of J&K v. Saba Wani, SLP (Civil) No. 12210 of 2023, decided on 30.04.2026, the Court held that closure of the Scheme does not defeat the rights of candidates whose names appear in a select panel approved by the Directorate of Education; such candidates are to be issued engagement or appointment orders according to their position in the panel and subject to available vacancies.

The protection, however, extends only to candidates included in the Directorate-approved select panel, and not merely to candidates appearing in a tentative list.

The Court accepted that the enquiry report supported the existence of an isolated habitation and that the petitioner had been placed at Serial No. 3 in the relevant tentative panel.

Nevertheless, the decisive question was whether the panel had been approved by the Directorate of Education.

Under Saba Wani, only candidates included in such an approved select panel retain a subsisting right after closure of the ReT Scheme.

The petitioner’s name appeared only in a tentative list, and the writ petition contained no averment or material showing that the list had received approval from the Directorate of Education.

Consequently, the enquiry report, the petitioner’s position in the tentative panel, the engagement of candidates placed above her, and the alleged availability of vacancies could not preserve her claim after closure of the Scheme.

Her claim was therefore not protected by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Saba Wani, and her right stood extinguished upon closure of the ReT Scheme under Government Order No. 919-Edu. of 2018.

The writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit.