Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors. on 20 July, 1994
Equivalent citations: 1994(2)WLN546
Author: P.K. Palli
Bench: P. K. Palli
JUDGMENT P.K. Palli, J.
1. Vide the order passed on 13.7.1994 the notices were ordered to be Issued to the respondents for 18.7.1994 to show cause as to why the petition be not admitted and disposed of at this stage, if possible. On that very day, the notices regarding stay application were also ordered to be issued. The matter came up before me in sequence of the above order on 18.7.1994 and the learned Additional Government Advocate put in appearance for the respondents and prayed time to file reply. The reply was ordered to be filed on or before 20.7.1994. While looking at the matter I formed the opinion that it was too short a matter which could be decided at the admission stage itself and its was for this reason it was ordered to be listed for arguments in the main writ petition itself. It is under these circumstances that the matter has come up before me again today and both the learned Counsel have consented that the matter be finally disposed of at this stage itself and I proceed to decide the same.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner Union on behalf of the Teachers Gr. Ill who have been ordered to be transferred by the District Education Officer respondent No. 3 It is said that the Teachers mentioned in Schedule A are members of the Union and they are regulated in matters of transfer by the Policy framed by the Government for the Session 1994-95 and has been placed as Annex. 1 on the record of this writ petition. These teachers mentioned in Schedule A are working as Teachers Gr.III (General) and the District Education Officer (Elementary) respondent No. 3 has issued the transfer order on 22.6.1994 Annex.2 which has been impugned in this petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that these teachers have been transferred on the strength of Condition No. 2 of the Transfer Policy Annex. 1 and on a reading of condition No. 2 of the Transfer Policy under which this power has been exercised by the respondent No. 3 these teachers are not covered by it and, therefore, Annex. 2 the transfer order be struck down. The operative part of Annex. 2 reads as under:
Dk;kZy;&vkns'k fuEukafdr r`rh; Js.kh v/;kidksa@v/;kfidkvksa tks fd orZeku esa Lohd`r inksa ls vf/k'ks"k inksa ij dk;Zjr gS fd LFkkukUrj.k rRdky izHkko ls LFkkukUrj.k uhfr&funsZ'k ¼94&95½ ds fcUnq la[;k ¼2½ esa of.kZr vf/kdre LFkkuh; Bgjko gksus ds QyLo:i muds uke ds lEeq[k vafdr LFkkuksa@fo|ky;ksa esa fd;s tkrs gSaA
3. Thereafter, the names of the teachers transferred appeared. It is stated that these teachers are still continuing on their present place of posting and have not yet joined the place to which they have been transferred. The operative part of this office order Annex. 2 in clearest terms makes out that these transfers are being made in sequence of condition No. 2 of the Policy of Transfer.
4. It is the admitted case that it is Annex. 1 which is the Transfer Policy for the Session 94-95 and the same was issued on 3.6.1994 by the Government. Condition No. 2 reads as under
¼2½ l{ke vf/kdkjh ;g lqfuf'pr djsa fd izR;sd ek/;fed o lhfu;j ek/;fed fo|ky; ls vf/kd ekun.M ds vuqlkj fo"k;k/;kid miyC/k gSA ekun.M ls vf/kd fo"k;k/;kid gksus dh fLFkfr esa vf/k'ks"k v/;kidksa dks vU; fo|ky;ksa esa LFkkukUrfjr fd;k tkos tgkWa fo"k;k/;kid dh vko';drk gksA vf/kdre LFkkuh; Bgjko okys v/;kid dks vU;= Hkstk tkosA
5. When read in English this condition makes out that the competent authority first of all has to satisfy itself that number of subject teachers working in the Government Secondary and Senior Higher Secondary schools does not exceed the department norms, meaning thereby that there should be no surplus subject teachers in Government Secondary and Senior Higher Secondary schools and further it says that in case the subject teachers are in surplus in that situation only those subject teachers may be transferred who have served for a longer time to a place where the post of subject teacher is available.
6. A reading of Condition No. 2 of the Transfer Policy on the strength of which the transfer order has been passed by the respondent No. 3 deals with those teachers only who are subject teachers and working in the Government secondary or Senior Higher Secondary schools and further the test laid down for the transfer is that only those teachers should be sent on transfer who have remained for a longer time on their place of working and further they have to be transferred to a place where the post of such subject teacher is available.
7. The petitioners on a plain reading of this policy and Annex.2 analysed above are not even remotely attracted and are not covered under this condition. Respondent No. 3, thus, completely misread, misinterpreted and misconstrued this condition while ordering the transfer of Teachers Gr. III deriving strength from this condition.
8. Learned Counsel for the respondents has brought to my notice item No. 1 at page 4 running page 20 of the paper-book. It is a part of Annex. 2 and there the District Education Officer is empowered to transfer the Teachers Gr. III within the district and within the division. Be that, as it may, it does not advance the case of the respondents since it deals with the power of transfer of respondent No. 3 in respect of Teachers Gr. III. The question as raised and placed before me is whether the order of transfer Annex. 2 in respect of the Teachers Gr. III be passed in exercise of the powers conferred by the Transfer Policy by applying condition No. 2 to the case of all these teachers.
9. In my opinion, there has been lack of non-application of mind by the respondent No.3 while issuing the transfer order. No such order could have been passed by the respondent No. 3 under condition No. 2 of the Transfer Policy Annex. 1.
10. Learned Counsel appearing from the side of the respondents is unable to support this order except the submission which I have noticed above.
11. Admittedly the teachers mentioned in the Schedule are not subject teachers nor they were working in Secondary or Senior Higher Secondary schools and Condition No. 2 of the Transfer Policy cannot be made applicable to them for the purposes of transfer. In the situation, I have no option but to quash Annex. 2 as without authority and having been passed in illegal exercise of power by the respondent No. 3. Further, it is stated in paragraph 4 of the petition which fact has not been denied that the subject teachers who are posted in the Secondary or Senior Higher Secondary Schools and who are covered by Condition No. 2 in respect of transfer policy, their transfer can be made only by the Deputy Director concerned and not by the District Education Officer (Elementary). In this situation also, the respondent No. 3 appears to have exceeded his jurisdiction.
12. Looking from another angle Annex.2 cannot be allowed to stand as the same does not appear-to have been brought out under certain guidelines as Condition No. 2 prescribes that only such teachers are to be transferred who have had a longer stay and they are to be transferred to a place where that subject post is available. The impugned order is further silent on these basic norms.
13. For the reasons recorded above, the impugned order Annex. 2 ordering transfer of Teachers Gr. III is quashed. The writ petition is allowed with no orders as to costs.