Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

HON'BLE MR. GEORGE PARACKEN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Applicant is a Post Graduate Teacher (English) presently working under Kendriya Vidyala No.2 at Calicut. He is aggrieved by the Annexure A-1 order dated 11/12.2.2008 posting Smt A.N.Mahita (the 5th respondent) from K.V., Alipurduar to K.V.No.1, Calicut on her request with immediate effect under Para 17.4 of the transfer guidelines of KVS, Annexure A-8 order of transfer dated 27/28.2.2008 transferring him from K.V.No.2, Calicut to K.V., Alipurduar in public interest with immediate effect, again under Para 17.4 of the transfer guidelines of KVS and Annexure A-10 memorandum dated 7.8.2008 by which his representation dated 25.2.2008 made by him pursuant to the direction of this Tribunal dated 30.6.2008 in O.A.126/2008 against the aforesaid Annexure A-8 transfer order was rejected by the respondents and directed him to get him relieved within 15 days and joined the K.V. Alipurduar immediately.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant joined the K.V., Calicut on 25.8.2005 after he had served in Kunjaban  Agarthala for over 5 = years with effect from 25.1.2000. While he was so working at K.V., Calicut, vide Annexure A-1 order dated 11/12.2.2008, the 5th respondent Smt A.N.Mahita was posted there as PGT (English). In order to accommodate the 5th respondent, one Shri Gopalan, PGT (English) at K.V.No.1, Calicut was displaced and posted to Alipurduar in West Bengal. Shri Gopalan challenged his transfer before this Tribunal in O.A.95/2008 stating that he had hardly 2 years to retire from service. During the pendency of the aforesaid O.A., the respondents themselves vide Annexure A-3 letter dated 19.2.2008 withdrew the transfer order of Shri Gopalan stating that he was coming under the LTR category and decided to transfer the next station senior in his place to accommodate Smt A.N.Mahita. When the applicant came to know about the said Annexure A-3 letter, he being the next station senior made Annexure A-4 representation dated 21.2.2008 stating that he had joined the present K.V only on 29.8.2005. not even completed his tenure of 3 years. He has also explained his personal difficulties that he is the only male member of his family and his 82 year old mother is bedridden. He has, therefore, requested the respondents not to shift him from the present station. He has also submitted that since the 5th respondent's husband is working at Chennai, she could very well be accommodated in K.V., Mandapam, Chennai Region where there is a vacancy of TGT (English). It was also also submitted that 3 more vacancies of PGT(English) in K.V., Ernakulam, K.V.No.1, Cochin and K.V.No.2, Cochin under the Chennai Region would arise by 1st April, 2008 and if it is necessary that he should be shifted from his present place of posting, he could be accommodated against any one of those vacancies. As the respondents did not respond to his aforesaid representation and apprehending his relieving from the present post, he approached this Tribunal in O.A.105/2008 and it was disposed of vide Annexure A-5 order dated 22.2.2008 directing the applicant to make a detailed representation to the 1st respondent for its consideration and to keep the proposal for his transfer to K.V., Alipurduar in abeyance till a decision is taken in the matter. The applicant made the Annexure A-6 representation duly forwarded by the 4th respondent (Annexure A-7). But his request was ignored and the respondents transferred him to K.V., Alipurduar in West Bengal vide the Annexure A-8 order dated 27/28.2.2008 stating that it was a transfer on public interest. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, he approached this Tribunal again vide O.A.126/2008. In reply to the aforesaid O.A, the respondents have admitted that the applicant's Annexure A-6 representation was not considered or .disposed of before the Annexure A-8 transfer order was issued. This Tribunal vide Annexure A-9 order dated 30.6.2008 disposed of the said O.A with the direction to the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the applicant dated 25.2.2008 and to take a judicious decision in the matter. In terms of the directions contained in the said order in O.A.126/2008, the respondents issued the impugned Annexure A-10 memorandum rejecting his request for cancellation of his transfer order to K.V., Alipurduar and directing him to join there after giving himself relieved within 15 days. While taking such a decision, the respondent No.1 made the following observations:

"(i) The applicant has been transferred from KV, No.2 Calicut to KV Alipurduar as per para 17.4 of the transfer guidelines vide order dated 27/28.2.2008. Hence there is no relevance of submissions made by the applicant in para (i) above to avoid his displacement transfer.
(ii)That as per para 1.1 of the KVS transfer guidelines effective from 14.3.2006, all employees of KVS are liable to be transferred and posted anywhere in India, at any time, and for any period, as requirements of public service and of the Sangathan may dictate.

6. In the reply statement, the respondents have submitted that there are as many as 979 KVs situated all over India including 3 abroad, and the employees of the KVs are liable to be transferred to anywhere in India in terms of Para 1.1 of Article 71 of the Education Code which has been reiterated in Para 1.1 of Annexure A-2 new transfer guidelines also and according to it, "all employees of the KVS are liable to be transferred and posted anywhere in India, at any time, and for any period, as requirements of public service and of the Sangathan may dictate. Transfers and posting are a right of the Sangathan, which it would endevaour to exercise in the best interest of the students, with due regard to the principles of equity and transparency vis-a-vis its employees." Further, they have submitted that Para 17.4 of the said Guidelines, Government has got the competence to depart from the transfer guidelines with the approval of the Chairman, KVS and to transfer any employee of the KVS from one place to another. Again they have submitted that on the directions of this Tribunal dated 30.6.2008 in O.A.126/2008 (supra) they have considered the applicant's representation dated 25.2.2008 and took a judicious decision in the matter. As regards the 5th respondent is concerned, she has already been transferred from K.V. Alipurduar to K.V.No.1 Calicut in terms of Para 17.4 of the transfer guidelines, as per the directions issued by the Chairman, KVS, keeping in view the merit of the case and the applicant has been transferred from K.V.No.2 Calicut to K.V. Alipurduar to accommodate the 5th respondent after cancelling the transfer order of Shri K.Gopalan, PGT (English) who was wrongly transferred to K.V.No.1 Calicut to K.V.Alipurduar as he was under the LTR category. Since the applicant was the station senior at Calicut, he was eligible for displacement and there was no illegality, malafide intention, injustice, ulterior motive or extraneous factors in his transfer but it was totally in public interest.