Assistant teacher sought transfer under Rule 8(2)(d) to a school near her husband's workplace after an earlier court-ordered reconsideration was rejected by the District Basic Education Officer. Court found no pleading that the order was arbitrary or a misinterpretation of Rule 8(2)(d) and dismissed the writ petition.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:124390
Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10887 of 2024 Petitioner :- Smt. Sarika Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- Archana Singh,C.S.C.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
"Heard Shri Anil Kumar Patha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no. 1, Smt. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and Shri Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.
By means of this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 27.12.2022 in regard to her transfer within limited period to transfer the petitioner in nearest school situated to the school of her husband.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is seeking her transfer from Composite School, Bikru, Vikas Khand Shivrajpur, District Kanpur Nagar to the nearest school of her husband who is working as Headmaster, at Prathmik Vidyalala Gambhirpur-Sought, Block Bidhnoo, District-Kanpur Nagar for the reasons that his husband is a handicapped person. Apart from this the petitioner's son aged about 9 years and 6 years requires attention of the petitioner being their mother. Living with in-laws will facilitate proper upbringing of the child and also allow her to discharge her duties as Assistant Teacher.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Rule 8(2)(d) of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers)(Posting) Rules, 2008 [in short 'the Rules, 2008'] which permits such inter-district transfers of women teachers in special circumstances at the place of residence of their husband or in-law's, which reads as under:-
"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."
Learned counsels for respondents submit that no policy has been framed by the Government as yet in this regard.
The contention is misconceived. The implementation of the provision in Rule-8(2)(d) is not dependent upon framing of any policy. This is not to say that the concerned cannot frame a policy but to say that if the Government does not frame any policy, it does not mean that Rule-8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008 can't be given effect. The Rules have been made under the Basic Education Act, 1972. There is nothing in the Rules to suggest that any policy is required to be framed under Rule-8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008 and only then such transfers can be made. The transferring authority, as informed by learned counsels for the respondents, is the Secretary, Basic Education Board because it is an inter-district transfer.
In view of the aforesaid, let respondent No. 3 to consider the request of the petitioner for transfer from Composite School, Bikru, Vikas Khand Shivrajpur, District Kanpur Nagar keeping in mind the facts of the case and the object sought to be achieved by Rule-8 (2) (d) of the Rules, 2008, expeditiously, preferably at the end of the academic session / within a period of two months from the date of service of certified copy of this order. The application shall not be rejected on the ground that there is no policy framed in this regard for the reasons already mentioned hereinabove.
With these observations/ directions, the writ petition is disposed of. "
Order Date :- 2.8.2024
Swati
Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Rule 8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008 permits the petitioner's inter-district transfer notwithstanding rejection of her representation by the District Basic Education Officer.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Sarika
State of U.P.
District Basic Education Officer, Kanpur Nagar
Prakash Padia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
