Petitioner, a differently abled teacher, filed a writ seeking direction to consider her representations against her transfer, citing a Government order mandating postings near native places for persons with disabilities.
Petitioner to be directed to consider representations and pass orders on merits within four weeks.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.09.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA
W.P(MD)No.15629 of 2016
M.Sumathi
... Petitioner
vs.
1)The Joint Director General of School Education, Office of the Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai.
2)The District Educational Officer, District Education Office, Tiruchirappalli.
... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 08.06.2016 and 02.07.2016 in the light of the Government order vide letter No.Ms.No.92/S/2009 dated 22.07.2009.
For Petitioner : Mr.H.Thayumana Swamy For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
''Attacking People with Disabilities is the lowest display of power I can think of''
This Writ of Mandamus has been filed for directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representations dated 08.06.2016 and 02.07.2016 respectively, in the light of the Government order vide Letter No.Ms.No.92/S/2009 dated 22.07.2009.
2.The petitioner is stated to be a differently abled person with 60% loco-motor disability due to Polio Paralysis. She is working as a P.G Assistant teacher under the 2nd respondent. She
had been appointed through the Teachers Recruitment Board. She https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ was initially appointed as a Block Resource Centre Trainer, by direct recruitment on 26.03.2003. Thereafter, she was transferred
2
to Trichy on 22.08.2006 and posted as B.T Assistant then, she was transferred to Pudukottai District. After several transfers, finally, she was transferred to Government High School, Pettaivaithalai, where she served from 01.07.2013 to 16.12.2014. Thereafter, the petitioner gave a representation to the District Educational Officer, Trichy, on 04.12.2014, stating that there is a vacancy at Government Higher Secondary School at Thuvakudi, which is 8 kms away from the residence of the petitioner. The District Educational Officer considered the petitioner's grievance and placed her in Government Higher Secondary School at Thuvakudi. Thereafter, on 27.04.2016, the District Educational Officer has transferred her from Thuvakudi to Pettaivaithalai, which is stated to be 50 kms away from her residence. This order is under challenge in this writ petition.
3.It will be relevant to extract the rights and privileges enshrined under the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, which reads as under:-
(i) to spell out the responsibility of the State towards the prevention of disabilities, protection of rights, provision of medical care, education, training, employment, and rehabilitation of persons with disabilities;
(ii) to create barrier free environment for persons with disabilities;
(iii) to remove any discrimination against persons with disabilities in the sharing of development benefits, vis-av-vis non disabled persons;
(iv) to counteract any situation of the abuse and the exploitation of persons with disabilities;
(v) to lay down a strategy for comprehensive development of programmes and services and equalisation of opportunities for persons with disabilities; and
(vi) to make special provision of the integration of persons with disabilities into the social mainstream.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Letter(Ms)No.92/S/09, dated 22.07.2009, issued by the Chief Secretary to Government, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, Chennai, in which transfer guidelines have been revised and under the revised guidelines, it has been decided by the Government that physically challenged Government servants shall be posted near to their native places wherever possible. Based on this G.O., it is the contention of the petitioner that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ her claim to be retained at Thuvakudi, has to be considered by the respondents.
3
Sd/
Assistant Registrar(CS-I)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar.
To
2)The District Educational Officer, District Education Office, Tiruchirappalli.
W.P(MD)No.15629 of 2016 06.09.2016
nbi
AM/GSV.PM/SAR-I/07.10.2016/3P/5C
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representations regarding her transfer in light of the Government order on placing differently abled persons near native places.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M. Sumathi
The Joint Director General of School Education and The District Educational Officer, Tiruchirappalli
S. Vimala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
