Punjab-Haryana High Court
Navjinder Mohan Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 13 August, 2010
Author: A.N.Jindal
Bench: A.N.Jindal
Civil Writ Petition No.14392 of 2010 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.14392 of 2010
Date of Decision 13.08.2010
Navjinder Mohan Singh
...... Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
...... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL
Present: Mr.A.D.S.Ghuman, Advocate, for the petitioner.
*****
A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL):
The petitioner has claimed himself to be E.T.T. Teacher since 13.10.1998 and has submitted that he has been appointed as Block Resource Person in the office of Block Primary Education Officer on 24.03.2004.
Thereafter, on 29.06.2010, he was transferred to Pandori Khazoor Block Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur under the rationalization Policy RTE 2009 where he joined on 03.07.2010. However, on 04.08.2010, he was asked to go back to his previous place as B.R.P. (Block Resource Person) in the office of Block Primary Education Officer which is strictly violative of the Act. Now, by way of this writ petition, he has shown the grievance that he should not be transferred from Pandori Khazoor Block Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur to the office of Block Primary Education Office, Block Tanda I, District Hoshiarpur. In this regard, the counsel has taken support from Section 25 (1) and 27 of the right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
Having heard the contentions, the Right of children to free and Civil Writ Petition No.14392 of 2010 2 compulsory Education Act, 2009, the Act provides free and compulsory education to the children and does not govern transfers of teachers or persons of other categories working in the education offices of the school. The Right of children to free and compulsory Education Bill, 2008 was proposed to be enacted, which seeks to provide--
(a) that every child has a right to be provided full time elementary education of satisfactory and equitable quality in a formal school which satisfies certain essential norms and standards;
(b) "compulsory education' casts an obligation on the appropriate Government to prove and ensure admission, attendance and completion of elementary education;
(c) "Free education" means that no child, other than a child who has been admitted by his or her parents to a school which is not supported by the appropriate Government, shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education;
(d) the duties and responsibilities of the appropriate Governments, local authorities, parents, schools and teachers in providing free and compulsory education; and
(e) a system for protection of the right of children and a decentralized grievance redressal mechanism." Section 25 of the Act was enacted just to maintain the pupil- teacher ratio and the purpose to enact the section was that no teacher would be deployed for any non-educational purpose other than those specified in Civil Writ Petition No.14392 of 2010 3 Section 27 of the Act. Again clause 27 prohibits the deployment of teachers for non-educational purposes except for decennial population census, disaster, relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament. The petitioner was appointed as Block Resource person in the office of Block Primary Education Officer and he had nothing to do with the pupil-teacher ratio, as such he could be transferred as such on the same post.
Resultantly, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.
(A.N.Jindal) Judge 13.08.2010 mamta-II