Disposed

Mahesh Mahwar v. State Education Departmentors

Rajasthan HC23 Aug 2016CW/11479/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of the writ petition by ordering it to be governed by the judgment and agreed directions in Smt. Rooplata Meena regarding teacher posting, transfers, and grievance redressal mechanisms in the education department.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner to file representation; department to notify posts and implement agreed directions for transfers and grievances.

Mahesh Mahwar Vs State Education Departmentors — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11479/2016

¶4

Mahesh Mahawar

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶7

DATE OF ORDER : 23/08/2016 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

¶8

Mr. Ram Pratap Saini, for petitioner/s Mr. S.K. Gupta, AAG, for the State

¶9

Learned counsel for the parties submit that issue involved in the present matter has already been settled by this court in bunch of writ petitions led by Smt. Rooplata Meena Versus State of Raj. & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10232/2016, decided on 19.08.2016. The court has passed an agreed order therein. In the light of the aforesaid, this writ petition may also be governed by the judgment (supra).

¶10

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of and ordered to be governed by the directions given in the judgment (supra). For convenience, agreed directions given in the case of Smt. Rooplata Meena (supra) are quoted hereunder:

¶11

(1) The petitioner/s would make a representation to the respondents raising his/her/their grievances against the order of posting. It would be by narrating ground for challenge of the posting. The representation aforesaid

¶12

¶13

would be submitted within a period of ten days from today along with certified copy of this order.

¶14

The respondent department i.e. Secondary as well as Elementary Education would immediately notify the vacant posts in different schools and out of which, in which school they are in need of a Teacher. If a vacant post exists in the school, but looking to the strength of the students, the Teacher may not be required then while notifying the vacant post in the school, it would be made clear by the department that against any post or posts, they do not need additional hands. It is agreed that if the department finds that additional hands are not required in a particular school or against a post, then such posts would not be filled by transfer for a period of three months.

¶15

(2) The Teachers of Level II posted against the post of Level-I would be transferred back to their post immediately after getting the new recruitees or on availability of the Teacher (Level-I). The said exercise would be undertaken vice-versa i.e. for transfer of Teachers Gr.III appointed on Level-I but transferred against the post of Level-II, if any.

¶16

(3) The department would post the Teacher against the post meant for specialised subject if their recruitment was in a particular subject or

¶17

¶18

they are teaching the subject for years together. The Teacher of subject would be transferred to a post of the said subject only so that students may not suffer.

¶19

(4) While undertaking the exercise, the department may take into consideration the guidelines issued on 8^th May, 2016 and 9^th May, 2016. While applying the said guidelines, the effort would be to redress the grievances of the petitioner/s.

¶20

(5) The petitioner/s would be at liberty to indicate his/her/their choice of school other than it is notified by the respondents.

¶21

(6) If mutual transfer is sought then it would be dealth with by the department. The request can be accepted because in the case of mutual transfer, it would not affect any one which includes even the department. The prayer for mutual transfer would be between the employees of same level of the post and set up apart from subject, if any.

¶22

(7) If the petitioner/s has/have already joined the post in pursuance of the orders under challenge, then his/her/their joining would not be taken adverse for disposal of the representation and carrying out the directions given.

¶23

¶24

(8) Apart from the issues referred above, if any other issue exists to seek change of the place of transfer, the petitioner/s would be at liberty to make a representation showing the ground for it like posting of husband and wife at one place, illness, disability, retirement in few months or any such similar ground.

¶25

(9) It is agreed that the representation would be considered by the department within a period of two months with necessary order.

¶26

[M.N.BHANDARI], J.

¶27

FRBOHRA

Mahesh Mahwar v. State Education Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Mahwar v. State Education Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Kumar Dhanka Vs State Home Departmentors

Kirti Kumar Khalle Vs Lal Singh Jat and Ors.

Bishambhar Dayal Saini Vs Harpal Singh and Others

Satish Vs Nemi Singh and Others

Amba Lal Vs Ballan and Others

Amilal Yadav Vs State Elementary Educationors