Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
25 Sri Ratanlal Halder vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 3 February, 2020
Author: Rajarshi Bharadwaj
Bench: Rajarshi Bharadwaj
1
16 03.02.2020. W.P. 231 (W) of 2020
jks
Ct.
25 Sri Ratanlal Halder.
Vs
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya,
Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya,
Mr. Partha Sarkar,
Mr. Abhijit Basu,
...For the Petitioner.
Dr. Sutanu Kumar Patra,
Mrs. Supriya Dubey,
...For the W.B. S.S.C.
Mr. Arindam Chattopadhyay,
...For the State.
This is an application under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by an
order of transfer dated 5.12.2019 made by the West Bengal School
Service Commission under Section 10 C of the West Bengal School
Service Commission Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the said
Act). This writ petition also challenges the vires of Section 10C of the
said Act.
Mr. Bhattacharya, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
the writ petitioner submits that order dated 05.12.2019 is an order
without any reason whatsoever and is without any basis in law. He
further submits that the petitioner is the Headmaster in the school
wherein he is presently teaching and he has been directed to go on
transfer to another school, which is situated 50 kms. Away from the
present school.
Mr. Bhattacharya, further submits that similar order have
been passed by this Court in these matters staying the transfer of
other teachers. He indicates an order dated July 25, 2018 passed in
AST 54 of 2018 (Sri Sandip Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal & anr.)
wherein this Court was pleased to stay the said transfer.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State
respondents submits that the transfer is an incidence of service and
is not required to be specifically mentioned in the terms of service or in the appointment letter. He therefore, submits that no stay should be granted in the light of the same.
Dr. Sutanu Patra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the School Service Commission submits that it if upon the 2 recommendation of the State that these transfers are being made.
After having heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, I am of the opinion that since stay has been granted in similar matters, in this matter also stay should be granted.
In the light of the above, the order of transfer dated 05.12.2019 is stayed till July 31, 2020.
This matter requires to be heard upon exchange of affidavits by the parties.
Accordingly, let affidavit-in-opposition be filed by the respondents within four weeks, affidavit-in-reply thereto, if any, be filed within two week thereafter.
Let this matter appear in the monthly list of cases for the month of April, 2020 under the heading ""for hearing".
Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.
(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)