IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OFASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, J.
Sri Duken Kato – Appellant
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 324 (AP) OF 2024
Decided on : 07-01-2025
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. D. Mozumder, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. S. Biswakarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Tagum, learned standing counsel for the Education Department, representing respondent no.1 to 4, Mr. D. Das, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R.B. Phukan, learned counsel for the respondent no.5, Mr. K. Loya, learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and Mr. D. Soki, learned counsel for respondent no.7.
2. It was jointly submitted at the Bar that the matter can be heard and disposed of at the “admission” stage as no more pleadings are required to be exchanged. Accordingly, on the joint prayer made by learned senior counsel and counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard.
3. The learned senior counsel and counsel for the parties are ad idem that as per the service rules in force in the State, the Principal of a Govt. Secondary School, Deputy Director of School Education (DDSE for short) and Deputy Director of Elementary Education (DDEE for short) belong to the same cadre and are analogous posts. It is also not disputed that the petitioner, during his service career, has remained outside his home district during last 16 years.
4. The case of the petitioner is that during the last part of the year 2020, the health of the mother of the petitioner had deteriorated and therefore, on 13.01.2021, he had submitted a representation before the Education Minister seeking posting at Aalo to enable him to take care of his mother, which was favourably considered and by order dated 04.05.2021, he was transferred as DDSE, Aalo, West Siang District. Accordingly, he had joined on 10.05.2021 and received charge on 17.05.2021.
5. Thereafter, on 02.11.2021, the MLA of Dirang Assembly Constitution had put up a “U.O.” note requesting transfer of Sri Yidak Angu (respondent no. 5), then posted as Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Yomcha. Consequently, a transfer order dated 21.07.2022 was issued by the Commissioner (Education), Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, thereby transferring 4 (four) persons, including the petitioner and respondent no.5. The petitioner was transferred from DDSE, West Siang District, Aalo to the post of DDSE, Office of Director Secondary Education, Itanagar. The respondent no. 5 was transferred from Govt. Higher Secondary School, Yomcha to DDSE, West Siang District, Aalo. The said transfer order was put to challenge by the petitioner before this Court by filing W.P.(C) 264(AP)/2022. The said WP(C) 264(AP)/2022 was disposed of by order dated 04.08.2022, with a direction to the Commissioner, Education, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh to dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner. The said representation was rejected by passing a speaking order dated 24.08.2022.
6. By filing W.P.(C) 292(AP)/2022, the petitioner had assailed the hereinbefore referred transfer order and speaking order. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court by judgment and order dated 28.09.2022. However, in Intra-Court appeal filed by the petitioner, by judgment and order dated 22.09.2023, W.A. No. 219/2023 was allowed by holding that the petitioner was transferred to accommodate respondent no.5 and therefore, illegal. Against the said judgment, the respondent no. 5 had filed Special Leave Petition (C) 22612/2023 before the Supreme Court of India, which was dismissed by order dated 13.10.2023. In the meanwhile, the petitioner joined as DDSE, Aalo on 11.10.2023.
7. The petitioner claims that as he came to know that the respondent no. 5 is trying to get posted as DDSE, Aalo, the petitioner had submitted a representation before the Chief Minister on 19.12.2023 with copy to the Commissioner, Education and submitted another representation before the Minister of Education and Commissioner, Education, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh on 17.07.2024, this time projecting that he would be superannuating in 7 (seven) months.
8. By an order dated 07.08.2024, issued by the Commissioner (Education), the petitioner was
State of Assam & Ors. v. Dilip Kumar Das
State of Assam v. Dilip Kumar Das
State of Assam v. Dilip Kumar Sarma
State of Assam v. Ranjit Chandra Barman
Transfer orders must comply with established policies, especially regarding employees nearing retirement, and cannot be influenced by political interference.
Transfer orders in public service must be made based on administrative necessity and public interest, and cannot be influenced by political pressure or arbitrary decisions.
The judicial review of an order of transfer and posting requires the presence of mala fide exercise of power or violation of statutory provision for interference.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of transfer and posting should be exercised honestly, bona fide, and reasonably, based on administrative exigency and public interes....
Court upheld transfer of university faculty under administrative grounds, affirming limited scope for judicial review in administrative transfer matters.
The court upheld the principle that mid-session teacher transfers adversely affect students' education, emphasizing the need for stability in educational settings.
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.