ORDER

Date : 16-03-2022 Heard Mr. S. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.

U. Sharma, learned standing counsel for the Secondary Education Department appearing for respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. P.K. Das, learned counsel for the respondent no.4.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking quashment of the transfer order dated 08.03.2019 issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam (respondent no.2), thereby transferring the petitioner from Assistant teacher of Rampur Chalapathar Sahed Ali High School to Kachua Higher Secondary School at his own grade and scale of pay. By the said order, it was provided that the petitioner cannot claim his seniority over existing staff of Kachua Higher Secondary School as per Rule 24(3) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provinicialised) Service Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘2003 Rules’).

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned transfer order was punitive in nature and that the transfer was made pursuant to a complaint made against the petitioner. It is also submitted that the seniority of the petitioner was disturbed although the petitioner had never asked for a transfer from the said school.

4. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education as well as the learned counsel for the respondent no.4 had vehemently objected to the prayer made in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the respondent no.4 has referred to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.4 and it is submitted that the allegations against the petitioner was serious in nature and that the conduct of the petitioner was so bad that the educational environment of the school had deteriorated which had resulted in complaints being made by the teachers, students, their guardians as well as members of the School Managing Committee and accordingly, a representation dated 29.09.2018 was submitted by the aggrieved guardians, members of School Managing Committee and the teaching staff to the Deputy Commissioner, which was also signed by the respondent no.4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to various news items appearing in newspapers as annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition. Reference is also made in the FIR dated 12.02.2017 by the President of the School Managing Committee before the Officer-in- Charge of Batadrava Police Station. It is also submitted that the show-cause notice has also been issued against the petitioner as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him. Accordingly, it is submitted that the transfer of the petitioner was in public interest and in the best interest of the school.

5. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the respondent no.4 has placed reliance on the following two cases:- (1) Union of India and ors. Vs. Janardhan Debanath and another, (2004) 4 SCC 245 and (2) State of U.P.

and another Vs. Siya Ram and another, (2004) 7 SCC 405.

6. The learned standing counsel for the Education Department has produced the records contained in two files which, amongst others, relates to the transfer of the petitioner. It would be sufficient to mention here that the said records discloses that there was a public complaint made before the Minister of Education, Government of Assam and thereafter note was prepared and accordingly an order dated 05.03.2019 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department and subsequently the impugned order dated 08.03.2019 was issued to transfer the petitioner. On a perusal of the said records, it is apparent that the transfer of the petitioner was made pursuant to a public complaint.

7. There is no material on record in the files produced by the learned standing counsel for the Secondary Education Department that the official notes leading to issuance of the formal transfer order dated 08.03.2019 that the said transfer was made in exe