In a writ petition, Neha Garg sought inter-district transfer as an Assistant Teacher to be placed near her husband. The single judge held that posting is a matter of service exigency, not a vested right, and dismissed the petition.
The petition filed by Neha Garg seeking transfer was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17816 of 2018
Petitioner :- Neha Garg And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amal Darsingh,Yagyavalk Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhola Nath Yadav
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
Vide order dated 21.08.2018, this petition on behalf of petitioner nos. 2 to 4 has already been dismissed and it survives only on behalf of petitioner no. 1, Neha Garg. Petitioner-Neha Garg is an Assistant Teacher presently posted at Saharanpur in Primary School run by Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad. She has filed this petition, seeking her transfer from District Saharanpur to District Gautam Buddha Nagar on the ground that her husband is in private job at District Gautam Buddha Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that transfer of teachers to the place of residence of their husband/in-laws' district are governed under Rule 8(2)(d) of Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules, 2008"). Rule 8(2)(d) of Rules, 2008 is reproduced hereunder:-
"8(2)(d). In normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teachers will not be entertained within five years of their posting. But under special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfers in respect of female teachers would be entertained to the place of residence of their husband or in law's district."
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any force to entertain the request of the petitioner for transfer to the place of her in-
laws. There is no vested right in favour of the petitioner to get her posted/transferred at the place of her husband. The posting/transfer is an exigency of service. The petitioner cannot claim her place of posting as a matter of right .
In view of the above, the petition lacks merit and substance. It is, thus, dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.8.2018 sushama
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a teacher has a vested right to transfer to the place of residence of her husband under Rule 8(2)(d) of the posting rules.
Whether transfer of teachers is a matter of right or service exigency.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Neha Garg
State Of U.P.
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
