The court s📖aid in such a situation, to hold that the woman would lose her status as a migrant only because she, out of the natural urge of forming a family, had to marry a non-migrant on account of existing circumstances, would be grossly “discriminatory and mil🌃itates” against the very concept of justice.
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has observed that there will be no change in the ไmigrant status of Kashmiri Pandit women even if they marry non-migrants, upholding a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order in favour of two women selected under PM employment package.
The two women -- Seema Koul and Vishalni Koul -- had moved the high court in 2018 after their provisional selection to the post of legal assistant in the department of disaste🦹r management relief, rehabilitation and re-construction under the PM package for Kashmiri migrants in🐻 December 1, 2017 forfeited on the ground that they have lost their migrant status having married non-migrant persons.
“One question of public important that arises bef♈ore this court is whether a woman who has been given a migrant status on account of the suffering endured by her and her family on account of which they were forced to leave their home and hearth in the Kashmir Valley...🐻, could be discriminated and would stand to lose the said status only on account of fact that she had got married to a non-migrant?
“Holding this would be going against the nature of human beings. Respondents herein, who are ladies and on account of no fault of theirs, had to leave their place of original residence in Kashmir Valley, cannot be expected to remain unmarried only to secure a job in theꦬ Kashmir Valley as a migrant,” a division bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Mohammad Yousuf Wani said in a seven-page order last month.
It is also reasonable to presume that because of the exodus, not every migrant woman would be in a position to find a🤡 match who himsel🦂f was a migrant, it said.
The court sai♕d in such a situation, to hold that the woman would lose her status as a migrant only because she, out of the natural urge of forming a family, had to marry a non-migrant on account of existing circumstances, would be grossly “discr🌺iminatory and militates” against the very concept of justice.
“This discrimination becomes even more brazen where a male mi🏅grant continues to remain a migrant notwithstanding the fact that he has married a non-migrಞant. Such a situation has arisen only on account of patriarchy that prevails in the human race. However, in matters relating to employment under the State/UT, such discrimination cannot be countenanced,” the court said, dismissing a writ petition filed by the Union Territory against the May 16 CAT order.
Nearly 4,000 Kashmiri migrant pandits are working in different departments in Kashmir after their selection under PM employment package, announced in 2008, having two major components – one pertaining to the provision of 6,00🌄0 jobs for the community youth and another pertain🧔ing to the provision of 6,000 accommodation units for the recruited employees.
Describing the tribunal order as “just and proper”, the court said the contention put forth by counsel for the appellant that th🧸ere was non-disclosure of the fact that the respondents were married, is of no consequence.
“Undisputedly, the advertisement notice does not provide for cancellation of the candidature 💎on account of non-disclosure or improper disclosure of facts/marital status. Further, the appellants have not been able to show how material injustice has taken place to those who could not get selected otherwise on account of such non-disclosure. Therefore, this argument is also rejected,” the bench said.