Back
2019 Supreme(Bom) 2318
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
Prasanna B. Varale, Avinash G. Gharote, JJ.
Sunita Laxmanrao Fuke - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 5706 of 2016; Civil Application No. 11106 of 2016
Decided On : 19-12-2019
S.R. Barlinge, Advocate, S.P. Sonpawale, Advocate, S.M. Gunjal, Advocate, Dilip Patil-Bankar, Advocate, A.N. Nagargoje, Advocate, V.J. Dhage, Advocate
Active participation and consent in a school transfer process estops the petitioner from challenging the transfer later.
Headnote:
Transfer of School - Education - Govt. Resolution dated 31/07/2013 - Summary: The court discussed the transfer of a school from one location to another, considering the consent of the teachers and parents, the condition of the school buildings, and the distance criteria as per the Government Resolution dated 31/07/2013. The court found that the petitioner had consented to the transfer, actively participated in the preparation of the proposal, and had joined the school at the transferred location. The court concluded that the challenge to the transfer was an afterthought and dismissed the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a teacher, challenged the transfer of the school from Baijipura, Aurangabad to Wadgaon-Kolhati, and her suspension by the school management.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had consented to the transfer, actively participated in the preparation of the proposal, and had joined the school at the transferred location. The court concluded that the challenge to the transfer was an afterthought and dismissed the petition.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the school transfer, the petitioner's consent, and the application of the distance criteria as per the Government Resolution dated 31/07/2013.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's active participation in the transfer process and subsequent objection constituted an afterthought, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
Prasanna B. Varale, J. - The present petition was heard alongwith other connected petitions, however, for the sake of convenience, we are deciding each petition separately, though the facts and documents are common.
2. By the present writ petition, the following two basic reliefs have been claimed by the petitioner:
(a) quashing and setting aside the order dated 19/03/2015, passed by respondent No.1 allowing the transfer of the school by name, Indira Prathmik Shala, run by respondent No.5- trust, from its original place Baijipura, Aurangabad to Wadgaon-Kolhati Taluka and Dist. Aurangabad and,
(b) quashing and setting aside the order dated 19/02/2016 passed by respondent No.5/trust, whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension .
Rest of the prayers are interim prayers in the petition.
3. At the outset, it is necessary to note that by a statement made at the Bar, by Mr. Barlinge, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, the challenge in the present petition was restricted in respect of transfer of the school from one place to another, which has been recorded by the Court in its order dated 24/10/2016, resultantly, learned Advocate Mr. Barlinge has restricted his arguments only to the challenge relating to the transfer of the school.
4. The petitioner claims to be appointed in the school run by respondent No.5 as an Assistant Teacher in the year 1993 against the permanent and clear vacancy in the primary school and claims to have been promoted on the post of Headmistress in the year 1998, in which post she claims to have been functioning till her suspension on 19/02/2016.
5. The petitioner claims that respondent No.5 /trust, which was running the school under the name, Indira Primary School, at Baijipura, Aurangabad, by misleading the authorities, sought transfer of the school to Wadgaon-Kolhati Tahsil and Dist. Aurangabad, by keeping the employees in dark. She also submits that this transfer was contrary to the Govt. Resolution dated 31/07/2013 and the transfer was opposed by her as well as other employees. She further contends that by the impugned order dated 19/03/2015, transfer of the school from Baijipura, Aurangabad, to Wadgaon-Kolhati was permitted by respondent No.1 under certain conditions, of which condition No. 10 indicates that in case there will be complaints about the transfer of the school, the transfer would be canceled. It is further stated that in pursuance to the order dated 19/03/2015, respondent No.3, Dy. Director of Education, Aurangabad, vide his letter dated 22/05/2015, directed respondent No.4 Education Officer (Primary) to take appropriate steps as per the transfer order dated 19/03/2015, in pursuance to which respondent No.4/Education Officer, vide his letter dated 03/09/2015, informed respondent No.5/trust about the above decision permitting the transfer. It is further contended that respondent No.5/trust also got the name of the school changed from Indira Primary School, Baijipura, Aurangabad, to Dnyanganga Public School, Baijipura, Aurangabad, as communicated by respondent No.4/Education Officer, vide his letter dated 14/02/2015.
6. It is further contended that the distance between Baijipura, Aurangabad and Wadgaon-Kolhati is 22 Kms. and such a transfer was not permissible under the terms of the Government Resolution, dated 31/07/2013, as a result of which, the petitioner and other employees had made various complaints to the authorities, which are fled at Exh. ''F'' collectively, on the receipt of which, respondent No.3/Dy. Director of Education, Vide his letters dated 21/10/2015 and 23/02/2016 informed Respt. No.4/Education Officer to take necessary steps. It is, thus, contended that when respondent No.5/trust realized that the petitioner was obstructing the transfer of the school to Wadgaon- Kolhati, it decided to hold an inquiry against the petitioner by leveling false charges and a chargesheet was issued to her, and pending enquiry, by a letter dated 19/02/2016, she was placed under sus
