Held that the writ petition by assistant teachers seeking district allocation revisions is devoid of merit as they have not completed the requisite five years of service required under Rules for transfer.
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. - 2
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5442 of 2021
Petitioner :- Dharvendra Kumar And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the third respondent.
Petitioners came to be appointed as assistant teacher in 2018, thereafter, they were posted in different districts as per Rules.
By the instant petition, petitioners seek the following relief:
"I. a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to forthwith revise the allocation of districts in the select list of Assistant Teachers after taking into account the preference expressed by the individual petitioners and their order of merit within a period to be specified by this Hon'ble Court."
Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the decision rendered by the writ court in Writ-A No. 19737 of 2018, decided in 29 August 2019, he submits that the instant petition be disposed of in terms thereof.
Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, submits that the judgment and order of the writ court was carried in intra court appeal being Special Appeal No. 274 of 2020 (Amit Shekhar Bhardwaj Versus State of U.P. and others). The batch of appeals came to be disposed of vide judgement and order dated 14 September 2021. The operative portion of the order reads thus:
"I. The candidates already selected/posted and working in the respective district of any category, shall not be disturbed.
II. The judgment in favour of the Meritorious Reserved Caste Candidates is not interfered. The petitioners-appellants belonging to Reserved Caste category would submit an application before the Board for change of posting pursuant to the judgment of the learned Single Judge within a period of two months of this judgment. The Board would thereupon process the case and post them as per their choice within two months. This direction would not be applicable in general but limited to the petitionersappellants whose writ petitions were allowed by the learned Single Judge.
III. The appellants and Intervenors belonging to Open General category
shall give option of three districts for their posting which would be considered by the Board within two months. They would be posted in any of the district of their choice subject to availability of the vacancy in the district concerned.
27. The directions given hereinabove are with the consent of the parties thus, it would not be treated to be precedence. If fresh litigation comes, it would not be driven by this judgment.
28. With the aforesaid, the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 29.08.2019 is modified and the special appeals are disposed of"
On being confronted with the above noted decision, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would not be covered by the judgment dated 29 August 2019.
On specific query, learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the petitioners have not put the requisite five years of service, therefore, the case of the petitioners are yet to mature under the Rules for seeking transfer to another district. No exceptional exigencies is pointed out so as to bypass the rigor of five years posting.
In view thereof, the writ petition being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Dismissal of the petition shall not preclude the petitioners to apply for transfer under the Rules as and when they complete the requisite service.
Order Date :- 20.9.2021 K.K. Maurya
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition seeking revision of assistant teacher postings is maintainable when petitioners lack the requisite five years of service.
Whether the principles laid down in Special Appeal No. 274 of 2020 are applicable to the present petitioners.
Dharvendra Kumar And 4 Others
State Of U.P.
Others
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
