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

2003 Supreme(Raj) 37

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Prakash Tatia
Vimlesh Chouhan - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3972 of 2002
Decided On : 01/17/2003

Appearance :
S.K.M. Vyas and G.K. Vyas, Advocates, for the Appellant.
M.R. Singhvi, Kusum Rao and R.S. Saluja, Advocates, for the Respondents.

The court emphasized the importance of a complete enquiry into the legal provisions and the effect of government orders before determining the jurisdiction of the authority issuing transfer orders. It also highlighted the significance of the statutory remedy of appeal provided before the Tribunal.

Headnote:

Primary Education - Transfer Orders - Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Rules of 1996 - The court discussed the effect of the order dated 29.4.2000 transferring the subject of primary education to the Panchayati Raj Institutions and the applicability of Rule 289 of the rules of 1996. The court found that the transfer orders passed by the District Primary Education Officer were not inherently without jurisdiction and dismissed the writ petitions.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petitions challenged transfer orders issued by the District Education Officer transferring teachers engaged in primary education in various schools within the State of Rajasthan. The petitioners argued that the orders of transfer were without jurisdiction as the subject of primary education had been transferred to the Panchayati Raj Institutions.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the transfer orders were not inherently without jurisdiction and dismissed the writ petitions. It held that the availability of the alternate remedy of appeal under the Rajasthan Civil Services Tribunal Act, 1976 was not an absolute bar against the maintainability of the writ petitions.

Issues: The issues included the jurisdiction of the District Primary Education Officer to pass transfer orders for teachers appointed under the rules of 1971, the effect of the order transferring primary education to the Panchayati Raj Institutions, and the applicability of Rule 289 of the rules of 1996 to the petitioners.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that without complete enquiry into the effect of the provisions of Rules of 1971 and the Act of 1994 and Rules of 1996, it could not be said that the transfer orders were patently and inherently without jurisdiction. It also held that the statutory remedy of appeal provided before the Tribunal could not be bypassed, making the writ petitions not maintainable.

Final Decision: The writ petitions of the petitioners were dismissed.

Judgment

Prakash Tatia, J.-Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. These writ petitions are decided by this common judgment as there are common questions of facts and laws are involved in these petitions.

3. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4 178/2002 has been filed by the Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh (Sanadhya) through its National Secretary Shri Kishan Gopal Joshi; whereas other writ petitions have been filed by private individual persons challenging the order of transfer, passed by the District Education Officer (Primary Education), transferring the petitioners engaged in primary education in various schools situated at different places but within the State of Rajasthan.

4. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the orders of transfer are without jurisdiction on the ground that though earlier subject of primary education was with the Education Department of the Government of Rajasthan but, the State Government decided to transfer the subject of Primary Education in the State of Rajasthan to the Panchayati Raj Institutions of the Rajasthan, to give effect to the 73rd Constitutional Amendment by which item No. 234 (B.) has been amended. For this the State Government issued order on 29.4.2000. Copy of this order is Annexure All. Therefore, entire administration of primary education now vests with the Panchayati Raj Institutions and the Dist. Education Officer though appointing authority of the petitioners left with no jurisdiction to pass the orders of transfers of the teachers engaged in primary education. The State government thereafter, further issued number of orders which also shows that the State government had intention to transfer the entire subject of Primary Education to the Panchayati Raj

Institutions and one of those order is the order dated 19.7.0 1 (Annex. A12). This order dated 19 July 2001 was issued by the State government, when the State Government came to know that, in the matter of transfer of teachers engaged in Primary Education, the orders are being issued in violation to the guidelines issued by the State Government, therefore, the State Government directed various authorities to see that the guidelines issued by the State government be followed strictly and in case any order in violation of the guidelines is issued, than action be taken against the guilty officer under the provisions of C.CA Rules and in the case against the public representatives such action may be taken under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act. It is relevant to mention here that the above order dated 19 July 2001 was issued by the Director, Panchayati Raj . Department, Government of Rajasthan.

5. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, not only this but, despite clear direction of the State government, the education Department officers did not stop issuing transfer orders, therefore, the State Government took a serious view and the State government issued another circular dated 28.2001 informing all concerned authorities that, to give effect to the decision of handing over work of primary education to the Panchayati Raj Institution, necessary amendments have been made in the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, therefore, all work relating to the primary Education which was being done by the Chief Executive Officer/The local Officer now will be done by the District Primary Education Officer/Sub-Primary Education Officer but it does not mean that work of primary education has been separated from the panchayat Samiti. In fact, Primary Education Officer has also been included with Chief Executive Officer and both will work under the control and supervision of Zila Pramukh. By this circular new guidelines are issued, making it clear that at district level, the Chief Executive Officer and at Panchayat Level, the Development Officer shall be Chief Administrative Officer and they will have powers, including the power to give directions to the District Primary Education Officer and to take proposals in the matter of trans


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top