The court upheld the principle that mid-session teacher transfers adversely affect students' education, emphasizing the need for stability in educational settings.

JUDGMENT :

(Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel appearing for the Appellants, Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as well as Sri Tej Bhanu Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

2. The instant appeal is listed alongwith Special Appeal No. 998 of 2024 (Manoj Kumar and another v. State of U.P. and others); however, since the appeals have been argued independently, the same are being decided by separate orders.

3. The present intra-Court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 5.1.2024, passed by a learned Single Judge, in Writ-A No. 20779 of 2023 [Naveen Kamal Srivastava and 2 others v. State of U.P. and others], praying for modification of the judgment and order and to allow the writ petition in toto with a further prayer for a direction that the petitioner-appellants would be entitled to avail all benefits flowing from sanction orders dated 26.6.2023 sanctioning their transfers.

4. The records of the case before us indicates that the writ petition had been filed praying for quashing of notices dated 23.9.2023 issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi, and the subsequent orders dated 29.11.2023 directing relieving of all the petitioners-appellants from District Jhansi with direction to report back to the original district Chitrakoot. The petitioners had also sought quashing of the Circular Letter dated 28.6.2023 issued by the Secretary, Board of Basic Education, U.P. Prayagraj, and a further direction to the respondents not to interfere in their functioning as teachers in District Jhansi and to pay their regular salary including arrears from July 2023.

5. The writ petition was finally disposed of with certain observations/directions in terms of an order dated 5.1.2024, which is being reproduced below:

''Order on Amendment Application No. 02 of 2023.

Heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

The amendment application is allowed.

Order on Writ Petition.

Learned senior counsel fairly submits that on the issue of clause 5 of a circular issued by the Secretary Basic Shiksha Parishad in pursuance of the transfer policy 2023-2024, this Court has reserved a judgement.

Learned senior counsel further submits that in peculiar circumstances of the present case that in pursuance of transfer orders passed by the respondents, petitioners were relieved from district Chitrakoot, and submitted their joining before the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Jhansi, respectively on 3.7.2023, 7.7.2023 and later on they were allotted their respective institutions and they have joined their also on 14.9.2023, 15.9.2023 respectively.

Learned senior counsel further submits that subsequently by the independent impugned order dated 29.11.2023 petitioners' transfer order was set aside which was brought on record by way of an amendment application and challenged, and they were directed to report to their original district Chitrakoot.

Learned senior counsel submits that at mid session of the present educational year, impugned orders will adversely affect studies of students and prayed that it may be set aside and at least kept in abeyance till end of present academic session so that they may file a fresh application for their interstate transfer if situation so warrant.

Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for respondents has opposed the aforesaid prayer, however, she has not disputed that normally no transfer is allowed in mid session.

In the aforesaid circumstances, without going into the merits of the case in regard to the effect of clause 5 of a circular issued by the Board, I find merit in argument of learned senior counsel for the petitioners that it would be adverse to the interest of students to allow petitioners to relieve from the