Decided on May 08,2012

Smt. Chandra Kala Sharma Appellant
State of Uttarakhand And Ors. Respondents


Tarun Agarwala, J. - (1.) An advertisement dated 14th December, 2011 was issued inviting applications for filling up the post of Assistant Teachers in Government Primary Schools. One of the conditions mentioned in the advertisement was that a candidate could only apply from his/her home district. The petitioner alleging that she fulfilled all the necessary qualifications applied for the post of Primary Teacher from District Dehradun. This application has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Pauri District and therefore her application cannot be considered for District Dehradun. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to consider the petitioner's application either for District Dehradun or in the alternative from District Pauri Garhwal.
(2.) A counter affidavit has been filed indicating that the petitioner was required to apply from the home district. The T.E.T. certificate filed by the petitioner indicated that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Pauri Garhwal which fact is not disputed by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that under the advertisement the condition imposed was that a candidate could apply from his/her home district and that it was not a condition that the petitioner was required to apply from her permanent place of residence. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is patently misconceived. The words "home district" has not to be understood in the liberal or ordinary sense of the words. The words "home district" cannot be treated in relation to the place of his temporary residence. On the other hand, it connotes the permanent residence of a person. This view of the Court finds support from a decision of the Supreme Court in Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) & Anr., 1994 (5) SCC 244. wherein the Supreme Court, while interpreting the word "residence" held that it connotes the permanent residence of a person.
(3.) Consequently, the words "home district" indicated in the advertisement reflects the permanent residence of the candidate. This is further clarified from the provision of clause 3(b) of the advertisement. Further, the purpose for filing the application from the home district is to enable the authorities to verify as to whether the petitioner is the permanent resident of that place or not. Since the petitioner was not the permanent resident of Dehradun, her application could not be considered from that district. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.