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

2024 Supreme(HP) 303

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA, J.
Rohit Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
CWP No.265 of 2024
Decided On : 08-01-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Motta.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol.

IMPORTANT POINT
The Transfer Policy clauses must be followed in considering a teacher's transfer request.

Headnote:

Transfer Policy - Teacher Transfer - The court directed the education authority to consider the teacher's transfer request in accordance with the Transfer Policy clauses and provide a personal hearing to the petitioner.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a TGT (Non-Medical) teacher, sought a transfer from a remote-rural area to one of the five stations of choice due to completed tenure and family circumstances.

Finding of the Court:

The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the education authority to consider the petitioner's transfer request in line with the Transfer Policy clauses and provide a personal hearing within four weeks.

Issues: Teacher's transfer request, compliance with Transfer Policy clauses

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the education authority to consider the transfer request and provide a personal hearing in accordance with the Transfer Policy clauses.

Final Decision: The court directed the education authority to consider the petitioner's transfer request and provide a personal hearing within four weeks.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the order(s) intended to be passed herein.

3. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition, with the following prayers:-

    i) “That the respondents may kindly be directed to transfer the petitioner from present place of posting i.e. Government Senior Secondary School Kotighat, Tehsil Kumarsain, District Shimla, H.P. to any one station mentioned in para 5 supra.”

4. The petitioner is a TGT (Non-Medical) and is presently serving in Government Senior Secondary School Kotighat, Tehsil Kumarsain, District Shimla. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is serving at the said station i.e. Government Senior Secondary School Kotighat, Tehsil Kumarsain, District Shimla, since 18.11.2019 initially on contract basis and then after his regularization in April, 2022 till day. The petitioner is also stated to have completed the normal tenure of two winters and three summers in the aforesaid School i.e. Government Senior Secondary School Kotighat, Tehsil Kumarsain, District Shimla, which as per Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Motta, learned counsel which is categorized remote-rural area in terms of the norms and principles governing transfers as in force.

5. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Motta, learned counsel that once the petitioner has completed the normal tenure of two winters of three summers in the aforesaid remote-rural area, as referred to above, coupled with the adversial family circumstances, the petitioner is stated to have made a representation on 04.12.2023 (Annexure P- 1), for considering his case for posting at one of the five stations of choice as mentioned in Para 3 of the representation.

6. Per contra, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned State Counsel, submits the that stations mentioned in Para 3 of the representation dated 04.12.2023 (Annexure P-1), is not in consonance with Clause 16.1 of the Transfer Policy, in view of the fact the petitioner was required to submit in more than one district.

7. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted three days time to file a supplementary representation, in continuation of earlier representation dated 04.12.2023 (Annexure P-1). The prayer being innocuous is not opposed by the learned State Counsel also.

8. In the entirety of the facts and circumstances, referred to above, this Court disposes of the instant writ petition by directing the Respondent No.2-Director of Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, to consider/examine the representation dated 04.12.2023 (Annexure P-1), including supplementary representation in case, the same is filed by the petitioner as aforesaid; and then to pass appropriate orders in the light of Clauses 12, 15 & 16.1 of the Transfer Policy, after affording a personal hearing to the petitioner, within four weeks from today.

9. Needless to say that, this Court has not adverted to the merits of the matter and all Questions of facts and law are left open.

As aforesaid, the instant writ petition, as well as, the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of, accordingly.

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
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