Back
2020 Supreme(MP) 155
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT BENCH AT GWALIOR
G.S. Ahluwalia, J.
Chandra Prakash Verma - Appellant
Versus
State Of M.P. And Others - Respondents
W.P. No.482 of 2020
Decided On : 09-01-2020
Shri Abhishek Singh Bhadoriya, Counsel, for the Appellant; Shri R.K. Soni, Government Advocate, for the State
Transfer as an exigency of service and the duty of the State to maintain pupil-teacher ratio under the Act, 2009.
Headnote:
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - Transfer of Teachers - Section 25
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, challenged his transfer from one primary school to another, citing violation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (the Act, 2009) due to discrepancies in pupil-teacher ratio and administrative exigency.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the transfer order did not violate the Act, 2009 as the pupil-teacher ratio would be maintained and the transfer was an exigency of service. The court also dismissed the petitioner's contentions regarding missing names from the online portal and his role as a Booth Level Officer.
Issues: Violation of the Act, 2009 due to transfer, discrepancies in pupil-teacher ratio, administrative exigency, and recommendations by local representatives.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that maintaining pupil-teacher ratio is the duty of the State under Section 25 of the Act, 2009. It also established that transfer is an exigency of service and individuals cannot claim posting at a particular place.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 23.11.2019 passed by respondent No.2 thereby transferring the petitioner from Primary School, Kunwarpura, Tahsil Seonda, District Datia to Government Primary School, Gyara, Tahsil Seondha, District Datia.
2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that he is working on the post of Assistant Teacher. It is the case of the petitioner that the transfer of the petitioner is contrary to the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (In short 'the Act, 2009', as three teachers were posted in the Primary School, Kunwarpura, Tahsil Seonda, District Datia against the total strength of 49 students whereas the petitioner has been transferred to Government Primary School, Gyara, Tahsil Seondha, District Datia where the total strength of student is 98 and four teachers are already posted there. It is submitted that on online portal, three teaches have been shown to be posted in Government Primary School, Gyara, Tahsil Seondha, District Datia whereas there are four teachers and the name of Smt. Geeta Kushwah has been missing from the portal. It is further submitted that the petitioner is working as Booth Level Officer and, therefore, he is treated to be on deputation to the Election Commission and the transfer of the petitioner has been made without taking concurrence of the Election Commission.
3. It is further submitted that local MLA and other representatives have also recommended for cancellation of the transfer, therefore, the respondents be directed to decide the said recommendation of the Local MLA.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. This Court in the case of Devendra Rajoriya vs. State of M.P. by order dated 6.12.2019 passed in W.P.No.26384/2019 has held as under:-
' Shri Brijesh Sharma, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Pawan Singh Raghuvanshi, Govt. Advocate for the respondents/ State.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 23/11/2019 (Annexure P1) passed by respondent No.4, by which the petitioner has been transferred from UEGS Dharam Singhkapura, Pithan, Block Ater, District Bhind to Primary School Kamanpura, Block Mehagaon, District Bhind.
(2) It is fairly conceded by the Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is working at the present place from the date of his appointment. It is submitted that the transfers are to be made from 22/06/2019 to 31/07/2019, however, the transfer order has been passed during ban period. Since the transfer order has been passed without approval of the Chief Minister-in Coordination, therefore, the transfer of the petitioner is bad. Further, there are only two teachers for twentyone students and if the petitioner is transferred, then only one teacher would be left, which would be contrary to the provisions of Section 25 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education, 2009 [in short '' the Act, 2009'']. The petitioner has been transferred to Primary School Kamanpura, Block Mehagaon, District Bhind where two teachers are already working there with less number of students. Thus, it is submitted that not only the transfer order has been passed during the ban period, but it is violative of Section 25 of Act, 2009 and there is no administrative exigency.
(3) Per contra , it is submitted by the Counsel for the State that so far as the question of ban on the transfer is concerned, the School Education Department by letter dated 15th November, 2019 has relaxed the ban from 15.11.2019 to 23.11.2019.
(4) So far as the requirement of maintaining ''pupil-teacher ratio'' under Section 25 of the Act, 2009 is concerned, it is submitted by the Counsel for the State that every step would be taken to maintain the ''pupil-teacher ratio'', however, the transfer of the petitioner be not quashed on the said ground. So far as the administrative exigency is concerned, it is s
