IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rekha Palli, Tushar Rao Gedela, JJ.
Sheekha Ahluwalia - Appellant
Versus
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 3620 of 2024, CM APPL. 14953 of 2024 -Ex. & CM APPL. 14954 of 2024 -Ex. (record) & W.P.(C) 3627 of 2024 & CM APPL. 14965 of 2024 -Ex W.P.(C) 3688 of 2024 & CM APPL. 15178 of 2024 -Ex & W.P.(C) 3724 of 2024 & CM APPL. 15340 of 2024 -Ex & W.P.(C) 3743 of 2024, CM APPL. 15424 of 2024 -Int. Dir. & CM APPL. 15425 of 2024 -Ex. & W.P.(C) 4141 of 2024 & CM APPL. 16937 of 2024 -Int. Dir W.P.(C) 4199 of 2024, CM APPL. 17156 of 2024 -Int. Dir. & CM APPL. 17157 of 2024, Ex. & W.P.(C) 4210 of 2024, CM APPL. 17215 of 2024 -Int. Dir. & CM APPL. 17216 of 2024 -Ex. & W.P.(C) 4236 of 2024, CM APPL. 17258 of 2024 -Int. Dir. & CM APPL. 17259 of 2024 -Ex.
Decided On : 01-04-2024
Transfer Orders - Administrative Tribunal - The court directed the petitioners to re-join their initial place of posting until fresh posting orders are passed by the respondents, as per the directions of the Apex Court and the new transfer policy formulated by the respondents.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged their transfer orders issued by the respondents, which were quashed by the Jabalpur Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The Apex Court accepted the proposal of the respondents to recall all the transfer orders and issue a fresh transfer policy. The petitioners were required to submit fresh options as per the circular dated 27.03.2024.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners' challenge to the transfer orders pending before the Tribunal had been rendered infructuous. However, the court permitted the petitioners to re-join their initial place of posting until fresh posting orders were passed by the respondents.
Issues: The issues involved the challenge to transfer orders, submission of fresh options, and the petitioners' request to join their original place of posting until new transfer orders were passed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners would be governed by the new transfer policy formulated by the respondents and the directions of the Apex Court. It was in the interest of justice to permit the petitioners to re-join their initial place of posting until fresh posting orders were passed.
Final Decision: The court directed the petitioners to re-join their initial place of posting until the fresh posting orders were passed by the respondents, and made it clear that the petitioners would be governed by the fresh transfer orders.
JUDGMENT
Rekha Palli, J. (Oral)
1. The present batch of writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seek to assail different but similar orders passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal. Vide the impugned orders, while issuing notice in the original applications preferred by the petitioners challenging their transfer orders issued by the respondents, the learned Tribunal has failed to grant them any interim protection thereby leading to a situation whereby these petitioners, despite continuing on the rolls of the respondents, are not rendering service in any school whatsoever.
2. It is the common case of the parties that the transfer policy dated 12.09.2022 pursuant whereto the transfer orders assailed by the petitioners by way of O.As pending before the Tribunal stands quashed by the Jabalpur Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court on 19.10.2023. The said order of the Jabalpur Bench was assailed before the Apex Court by way of SLP (Civil) No. 245825/2023, which petition has been disposed of vide order dated 19.03.2024 by accepting the proposal of the respondents to recall all the transfer orders issued under the transfer policy dated 12.09.2022 and issue a fresh transfer policy. In terms of these directions issued by the Apex Court, the respondents are required to display the available vacancies as on 31.01.2024 on its website so that all the concerned teachers can give three options. We are informed that a circular in accordance with these directions of the Apex Court has already been issued by the respondents on 27.03.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that now that the petitioners are required to submit fresh options and the transfer orders assailed by them before the learned Tribunal stand withdrawn, nothing survives for adjudication in the present petitions. He, therefore, prays that the petitions be disposed of by directing the petitioners to submit their fresh options in accordance with the circular dated 27.03.2024.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners, while conceding that challenge to the impugned orders has now been rendered infructuous, pray that till the petitioners submit their fresh options, they be permitted to join their original place of posting, as has been directed by this Court in a batch of petitions including W.P. (C) 1977/2024. They further submit that the order passed by this Court in W.P. (C) 1977/2024 on 16.02.2024 was challenged by the respondents before the Apex Court by way of SLP (Civil) No. 6544/2024, which SLP has been disposed of without interfering with the directions issued by this Court by clarifying that the parties would now be governed by the order dated 19.03.2024 passed in SLP (Civil) No. 245825/2023.
5. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that Mr. Rajappa is correct in urging that the parties will now be bound by the terms of the proposal as approved by the Apex Court in its order dated 19.03.2024 and would therefore be governed by the new transfer policy formulated by the respondents. Further, in terms of the directions issued by the Apex Court, all the transfer orders issued in terms of policy dated 12.09.2022 will stand withdrawn and they will now be required to submit three fresh options, based on which they may be again transferred by the respondents. Accordingly, we are of the view that the petitioners' challenge to these transfer orders pending before the learned Tribunal has been rendered infructuous. We, however, find merit in the petitioners' plea that till the time they submit their three options and fresh transfer orders are passed in terms of the circular dated 27.03.2024, they ought to be permitted to discharge their duties at their original place of posting as was directed in W.P. (C) 1977/2024 and various other connected petitions including W.P. (C) 2623/2024.
6. In the light of the aforesaid, we are of the view that to enable the petitioners to s
Transfer orders are part of service conditions and not subject to judicial review unless malafide or against service rules.
Transfer policy guidelines do not confer legally enforceable rights unless there is a violation of statutory rules or mala fide.
The court upheld the principle that mid-session teacher transfers adversely affect students' education, emphasizing the need for stability in educational settings.
Government servants have no vested right to remain posted at a particular place, and interference with transfer orders should be limited to cases of mala fides or violation of specific provisions.
The transfer orders for teachers issued by the Director of General Education were declared unsustainable due to violation of established norms, emphasizing the necessity for adherence to procedural f....
Transfers of government teachers must comply with established administrative guidelines to ensure fairness and avoid arbitrary decisions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.