Madhya Pradesh High Court
Munna Lal Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 September, 2023
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1 W.P. No.24103/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
ON THE 21th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No.24103 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
MUNNA LAL AHIRWAR S/O SHRI KHET LAL
AHIRWAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: UCCH MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK
AT GOVT. H S SCHOOL MAGRON, DISTRICT
DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI DR. ANIL KUMAR PARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
SCHOOL DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA,
VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. COMMISSIONER, DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION GAUTAM NAGAR BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, DAMOH
DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SWAPNIL GANGULY - DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL)
.........................................................................................................
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 31/08/2023 passed by Commissioner, Directorate of Public Instruction, in file No.Transfer/2023/20- Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 23-Sep-23 10:44:57 AM 2 W.P. No.24103/2023 01/139462, by which petitioner has been transferred from Government Higher Secondary School Magron, District Damoh to Government Higher Secondary School Makri, District Panna.
2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that no reason has been assigned for transfer of petitioner. Children of petitioner are studying and transfer of petitioner would adversely affect their studies. Petitioner was the only Geography teacher and his transfer would disturb the Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR).
3. Per contra, petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for the State. It is submitted that transfer is an exigency of service and no one can claim that he should be posted at a particular place.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. It is the case of petitioner that by order dated 25/03/2021, he was transferred from Government Higher Secondary School Kantee, District Damoh to Government Higher Secondary School Magron, District Damoh. Thus, it is clear that earlier transfer of petitioner was within district and now he has been transferred to a different district i.e. Panna. Merely because petitioner has been transferred within 2&1/2 years of his earlier posting, is not sufficient to quash the transfer order.
6. Clause 17 of transfer policy provides that generally a Class-3 executive officer and employee can be transferred after three years of his posting at a particular place. Thus, the use of word 'generally' in clause 17 of transfer policy makes it abundantly clear that there is no absolute bar on transfer of an employee before completion of his regular tenure of three years.
7. So far as the question of non-availability of Geography teacher is concerned, it is suffice to mention here that it is for the State to maintain Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 23-Sep-23 10:44:57 AM 3 W.P. No.24103/2023 PTR as guaranteed under Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and in case if respondents are of the view that PTR has stood disturbed on account of transfer of petitioner, then they shall immediately post some other teacher so that PTR is maintained. However, transfer of petitioner cannot be quashed on the ground that transfer of petitioner would disturb the PTR.
8. Furthermore, it is clear that petitioner must have spent considerable long time in District Damoh. Transfer is an exigency of service and in absence of any malafides, no one can claim that he should be allowed to continue at a particular place.
9. At this stage, it is submitted by counsel for petitioner that petitioner has made a representation which has not been decided so far, therefore respondents may be directed to decide the same and till then transfer order of petitioner may be kept in abeyance.
10. Considered the submissions made by counsel for petitioner.
11. A Division Bench of the Court in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. reported in ILR 2015 MP 2556 has held that mere filing of a representation does not give rise to a vested right and it is the prerogative of the employer to stay or not to stay the transfer order during the pendency of the representation. In case if the transfer order is not stayed by the employer then it has to be executed by the employee. Accordingly, it was held that in absence of any vested right, the High Court should not pass an interim order thereby staying the execution of transfer.
12. Since petitioner has not joined at the transferred place, therefore, at present, no direction can be issued to respondents to decide the representation. However, it is made clear that petitioner after submitting Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 23-Sep-23 10:44:57 AM 4 W.P. No.24103/2023 his joining may file an application for urgent hearing of his representation and if that is filed then respondents shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law without getting influenced or prejudiced by this order.
13. With aforesaid observation, petition is finally disposed of.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Shubhankar Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 23-Sep-23 10:44:57 AM