SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Ker) 685

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
G. Sasidharan, J.
Corporate Manager – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
O.P. No.22077 of 2000
Decided On : 25-08-2000

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: K.R.B. Kaimal & Paul C. John
For the Respondent: P. Sankarankutty Nair

Headnote:

Kerala Education Rules 1959 Chapter XIV-A R. 10 - Challenge - Issued - Transfer of Teachers - Respondents filed appeals petitions before second respondent against orders passed by petitioner - Notice was issued by second respondent to the petitioner to appear for hearing appeals petitions filed by respondents petitioner appeared before second respondent in connection with those matters and second respondent issued and orders quashing transfer orders respondents are under challenge this Original Petition -Held, Court held that transfer employee part conditions of service and employees are bound to obey the orders of transfer and work in the place where they have been transferred and posted and that transfers from one establishment to another is incident of service and that employer is best judge to decide whether transfer has to be made or not - Case in which petitioner who is competent for effecting transfer effected transfer of respondents issuing orders - Thereafter as directed by Director Public Instruction after considering representations given by respondents decision was arrived at there was no need reconsidering the transfer effected - Petition allowed

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner is the Corporate Manager of L.M.S. Schools owned by the South Kerala Diocese of Church of South India, a minority community. The Diocese owns schools situated in difference parts of Trivandrum and Kollam Districts. The schools are aided schools governed by the provisions of the Kerala Education Act and the Rules. Ext. P2 is the order by which 25 High School Assistants/Language Teachers including respondents 3 to 6 were transferred. Respondents 3 to 6 and certain others transferred under Ext. P2 filed representations before the second respondent - Director of Public Instruction - to set aside the order of transfer. The representations submitted before the second respondent were disposed of directing the teachers to make individual representations to the Manager and the Manager was directed to consider and dispose of the representations.

2. Exts. P5 to P8 are copies of representations submitted by respondents 3 to 6 before the petitioner. On considering those representations in the light of the direction given by the second respondent, the petitioner arrived at the decision that there is no ground to modify the order of transfer in the case of respondents 3 to 6 and as per Exts. P9 to P12 rejected their representations.

3. Respondents 3 to 6 filed appeals/petitions before the second respondent against Exts. P9 to P12 orders passed by the petitioner. Notice was issued by the second respondent to the petitioner to appear for hearing the appeals/petitions filed by respondents 3 to 6. The petitioner appeared before the second respondent in connection with those matters and the second respondent issued Exts. P16 and P17 orders quashing the transfer orders of respondents 3 to 6. Exts. P16 and P17 are under challenge in this Original Petition.

4. The Corporate Educational agency is competent to transfer teachers from one school to another as per the provisions contained in R. 10, Chapter XIVA of the Kerala Education Rules (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”). The provision in the above Rule is that in effecting such transfers the principles followed in Government schools shall be observed to the extent possible. The rule does not say that transfer of teachers can only be made in accordance with the principles followed in Government schools. But what it provides is that as far as possible principles followed in Government schools shall be observed in the case of transfer of teachers in aided schools. The above rule provides that principles of transfer shall be as stated in that rule. R. 10 of the Rules envisages that the chief and formost criterion for transfer of Headmaster shall be the seniority and that every Headmaster shall be allowed to exercise choices of three or more schools. Exceptions to the seniority criterion shall be the bare minimum and exception shall include close relatives of jawans, intercast marriage, physically handicapped, other grounds for special consideration, compassionate grounds, persons who have only one year of service left for retirement etc. Transfer can also be made under administrative interest and it shall include unsuitability, allegations of corruption, misuse of official position, disciplinary action, incompetence and consistent poor performance.

5. Ext. P1 is the guidelines for general transfer in respect of Government servants. General transfer has to be made in all departments once in a year before 15th May. The provision in the guidelines is that a person who has not completed three years of service in a particular station should not be transferred. It also provides that a person need not be transferred from a station for the sole reason that he has completed three years in that station. Such a person can be transferred from that station when another person who has completed three years in a particular station asks for transfer to that station. The guidelines also envisages transfer on public interest.

6. R. 10(5) of the Rules says that cases of deviation from the seniori




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top