Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.
Smt. Arpita Guin – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.A. 10552 & 18505, 20005, 30719 of 2016
Decided On : 21-03-2024
Transfer - School Service Commission - 2015 Rules - The judgment discusses the recommendation for transfer of a teacher from one school to another, based on the 2015 Rules. The court analyzed the eligibility criteria, the procedure for submission of application, and the grounds on which a prayer for transfer can be made under the 2015 Rules. It held that the transfer order was issued in violation of the statutory rule requiring a no objection certificate from the Head of the institution of the parent school and non-consideration of the effect of the pendency of a criminal case at the relevant point of time. The court set aside and quashed the transfer order dated 30.03.2016.
Fact of the Case:
The teacher was recommended for transfer from one school to another based on the 2015 Rules. The school challenged the recommendation, and the teacher sought various reliefs related to the transfer.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfer order was issued in violation of the statutory rule requiring a no objection certificate from the Head of the institution of the parent school and non-consideration of the effect of the pendency of a criminal case at the relevant point of time. The court set aside and quashed the transfer order dated 30.03.2016. The other writ petitions seeking reliefs related to the transfer were dismissed.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the transfer order under the 2015 Rules, including the eligibility criteria and procedural requirements for transfer.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the transfer order was issued in violation of the statutory rule requiring a no objection certificate from the Head of the institution of the parent school and non-consideration of the effect of the pendency of a criminal case at the relevant point of time. The court set aside and quashed the transfer order dated 30.03.2016.
Final Decision: WPA 18505 of 2016 stands allowed. WPA 10552 of 2016, WPA 20005 of 2016 and WPA 30719 of 2016 stands dismissed. The court's decision does not preclude the teacher from applying for transfer afresh in terms of the relevant rules in case the teacher succeeds in her challenge against the order declaring the post of Assistant Teacher in the school held by her vacant on account of her resignation due to long absence.
JUDGMENT :
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.
1. The Chairman, West Bengal Central School Service Commission (for short “SSC”) vide Memo dated 30.03.2016 recommended transfer of Arpita Guin (for short “the teacher”) from Barhra High School (for short “the school”) to Uttar Rabindranagar Vivekananda High School (H.S.) (for short “the transferee school”). Pursuant to the said recommendation, the Administrator of the transferee school issued a letter dated 23.05.2016 appointing the teacher as an Assistant Teacher in the transferee school.
2. WPA 10552 of 2016 (for short “WP-1”) is at the instance of the teacher praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the School to issue the release order so that the teacher can join the transferee school.
3. WPA 18505 of 2016 (for short “WP-2”) is at the instance of the School praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus commanding the SCC and its Chairman to rescind, recall and withdraw the Memo dated 30.03.2016.
4. WPA 20005 of 2016 (for short “WP-3”) is at the instance of the teacher praying for a direction upon the Teacher-in-charge of the School to release the arrear salary on and from January, 2016 after regularizing the leave of the teacher and for a further direction upon the school to forward relevant documents to the transferee school.
5. WPA 30719 of 2016 (for short “WP-4”) is at the instance of the teacher praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus commanding the authorities of the transferee school to allow the teacher to join the transferee school without the release order.
6. Common question of law and fact arise in the aforesaid writ petitions for which the same were heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.
7. WP-2 has been filed for setting aside the recommendation for transfer vide Memo dated 30.03.2016. The other writ petitions have been filed claiming various reliefs flowing from the said Memo dated 30.03.2016. This Court, therefore, proposes to decide the writ petition challenging the Memo dated 30.03.2016 first as the fate of the other writ petitions will depend upon the outcome of WP-2.
8. For better appreciation of the disputes involved between the contesting parties, narration of facts pleaded by the school and the teacher in WP-2 would suffice and, therefore, the relevant facts pleaded in the respective affidavits are stated hereinafter.
9. Case made out by the school in WP-2, in a nutshell are as follows-
Being aggrieved by the order making recommendation for transfer, the Managing Committee and the Teacher-in-Charge of the School have approached this Court.
10. Teacher contested WP-2 by filing an Affidavit-in-opposition denying the allegations contained in the writ petition. The teacher stated that she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher of the School on 24.09.2008 and since the first day of her service, the school authority did not allow her to work smoothly and properly. She got married in the year 2010 and her husband is a
The transfer order was issued in violation of the statutory rule requiring a no objection certificate from the Head of the institution of the parent school and non-consideration of the effect of the ....
The court determined that a teacher's transfer based on claims of being a 'Victim of Crime' was invalid due to lack of corroborating evidence and the failure to meet statutory requirements under tran....
Transfer policy guidelines do not confer legally enforceable rights unless there is a violation of statutory rules or mala fide.
Statutory authorities must act within defined limits, and regulations do not permit delaying transfers due to non-availability of volunteers for temporary positions.
Statutory authorities must act within their prescribed powers; delaying a transfer due to lack of a willing candidate contradicts established rules.
Transfers of government teachers must comply with established administrative guidelines to ensure fairness and avoid arbitrary decisions.
The requirement of the subject should have precedence in transferring teachers from unaided to aided school. Seniority should only be considered when there are multiple teachers in the subject in whi....
The G.R. on teacher transfers aligns with the RTE Act by maintaining Pupil-Teacher ratios and does not violate statutory rights of teachers.
The court clarified the jurisdictional issue and upheld the application of the transfer rules under the 2008 Act for teachers appointed prior to the introduction of the Act, emphasizing the loss of c....
Ratification from the competent authority is a prerequisite for the validity of transfer orders in public service.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
