Madhya Pradesh High Court
Subhash Kumar Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 September, 2023
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1 W.P. No.23713/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
ON THE 19th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No.23713 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SUBHASH SINGH PARIHAR S/O SHRI SHIVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT TEACHER,
GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL R/O WARD
NO 6,7 AMKUI, POST AMKUI, DISTRICT SATNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(NONE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION,
VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. THE COMMISSIONER, LOK SHIKSHAN
SANCHNALAYA, B WING, ARERA HILLS,
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER,
SATNA DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MOHAN SAUSARKAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
.........................................................................................................
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
None for petitioner even in the second round.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 20-Sep-23 4:49:16 PM 2 W.P. No.23713/20232. This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed against order dated 10/08/2023 passed by respondent No.2, by which petitioner has been transferred from GPS Ward No.6, 7 Amkui, District Satna to GMS Vishanupur, District Satna.
3. It is the case of petitioner that wife of petitioner has recently undergone a surgery and he is required to stay with her for her treatment. Mother of petitioner is suffering from mental ailment and both of his parents are financially dependent on him. Transfer of petitioner will disturb Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR) as required to be maintained under Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
4. Per contra, petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for the State. It is submitted that petitioner has not disclosed the period of his stay at the present place of posting.
5. Considered the grounds raised in Writ Petition and heard counsel for the State.
6. Petitoner has filed a certificate issued by himself as Annexure P-6 to show that one teacher has been transferred and after his transfer, only one teacher is left.
7. Be that whatever it may be.
8. It is the duty of respondents to maintain PTR and therefore, it is directed that in case if it is found that transfer of petitioner will adversly affect the PTR, then PTR shall be restored back after transferring some other teacher to the present place of posting.
9. So far as personal difficulties of petitioner are concerned, it is suffice to mention here that this Court cannot look into the personal Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 20-Sep-23 4:49:16 PM 3 W.P. No.23713/2023 difficulties of an employee and it is for the employer to consider the same.
10. So far as illness of wife of petitioner is concerned, it appears that she has undergone hysterctomy on 09/09/2022. So far as mental illness of mother of petitioner is concerned, it is suffice to mention here that petitioner has filed a single prescription dated 31/08/2023, i.e. after transfer order was issued.
11. Be that whatever it may be.
12. Transfer is an exigency of service and no one can claim that he should be posted at a particular place, specifically when petitioner must have completed his normal tenure of more than three years.
13. From Writ Petition, it appears that petitioner has filed a representation.
14. 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.
15. 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 his joining may file an application for urgent hearing of his representation and if that is filed then respondents shall decide the same Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 20-Sep-23 4:49:16 PM 4 W.P. No.23713/2023 strictly in accordance with law without getting influenced or prejudiced by this order.
16. With aforesaid observation, petition is finally disposed of.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Shubhankar Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 20-Sep-23 4:49:16 PM