16.05.2025.

Ct.No.7.

as WPA 27943 of 2022 Rajsekhar Basu Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Ujjal Ray, Mr. Atreya Chakraborty, Ms. Manishikha Mondal.

…for the Petitioners.

Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra, Ld. Sr. Govt. Adv., Mr. Sudip Sarkar.

…for the State.

Mr. Sourav Mitra.

…for the Central School Service Commission.

Mr. Pinaki Dhole, Ms. Pranita Mandal, Mr. Rabindra Kr. Pathak, Ms. Srijita Mandal.

…for the Respondent Nos.7 & 8.

1. Affidavit-in-reply filed in Court today is taken on record.

2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the decision of the school authority in refusing to recommend the petitioner‟s transfer and in not forwarding his request for transfer to the District Inspector of Schools concerned through the „Utshashree‟ portal. In addition, the petitioner seeks a direction upon the concerned respondents to take appropriate steps to facilitate his transfer to a school located near his residence, preferably to one of the following institutions: (i) Badkulla United Academy, (ii) Santipur Municipal High School, or (iii) Chakdaha Ramlal Academy

3. Sans unnecessary details, the relevant facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner began his service career as an Assistant Teacher in Physics at Bagdah High School (HS) on 12th October, 2007. His appointment was subsequently approved with effect from 5th July, 2011. Due to the lack of direct connectivity between his residence and the school, the petitioner has been facing considerable inconvenience in attending the school. As a result, he approached the school authority with a request to recommend and forward his prayer for transfer to the District Inspector of Schools, seeking a posting at a school nearer to his residence. In furtherance of this, he also submitted the required data through the 'Utshashree'

portal.

4. However, the school authority refused to forward the petitioner‟s prayer for transfer on the following ground:

“At present 15 posts of Assistant Teachers are vacant in the school. In the interest of the education of the students of the school the SMC decides not to issue NOC in favour of Rajsekhar Basu.”

5. Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that that ground is not available to the school authority for refusing to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) in favour of the petitioner. He further submits that the process for dealing with transfer applications is governed by a rules framed by the State, namely, the West Bengal School Service Commission (General Transfer, Transfer on Special Grounds and Reallocation) Rules, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

2015 Rules').

6. He submits that the said Rule was subsequently amended. Inviting my attention to Rule 6 of the amended Rule, he submits that the only grounds available to the school authority, based on which it can refuse to forward the transfer application of a teacher, are if the resultant vacancy in the school in a particular subject becomes zero or is not commensurate with the roll strength. The school authority, while dealing with such application, was directed to consider that the total applications from the school do not exceed 10% of the total strength of teachers.

7. He submits that from the affidavit filed on behalf of the State authority, it is evident that the current roll strength of the school is 2,175. He further submits that at present, 35 students have enrolled in Physics in the Higher Secondary section of the school. He states that there are currently two teachers, including the petitioner, in the Physics department. Therefore, according to him, if the petitioner‟s prayer for transfer is allowed, the students of the school will not be prejudiced. In support of his contention, he has relied upon an unreported decision of the Hon‟ble Division Bench of this Court in MAT 1828 of 2024, IA No. CAN 1 of 2024 (Arpita Pradhan vs. The State of West Bengal &

Ors.).

8. Mr. Dhole, learned advocate appearing for the school authority, opposes the co