Allowed

Inder Mohan Singh Chhabra v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Jan 2024CW/2533/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition filed by a senior teacher seeking relief and transfer. The bench held that the petitioner could not be barred from transfer based on prior appointment status or TSP/Non-TSP distinctions, relying on a precedent that struck down similar restrictive clauses in transfer orders.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to implement order dated 28.08.2022 or pass fresh order posting the petitioner within District Ajmer.

Inder Mohan Singh Chhabra Vs State of Rajasthan — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:757]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2533/2023

¶4

Inder Mohan Singh Chhabra S/o Ranjeet Singh Chhabra, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Behind Convent School Band Kuye Ke Pas, 942/34 Dhanwani Niwas Ajmer Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Director Of Secondary Education Bikaner Rajasthan.

¶8

The Director, Secondary Education Bikaner Rajasthan. 3. The Joint Director, School Education Udaipur Division Udaipur Rajasthan.

¶9

Principal, Mahatma Gandhi Government School Station Chittorgarh District Chittorgarh 224205.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Ripudaman Singh.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Sarwan Kumar,AGC.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶13

Order

¶14

05/01/2024

¶15

Prayer clause of the petition herein is reproduced in verbatim

¶16

as below:-

¶17

“A) By an appropriate writ order or direction, respondents may kindly be directed to relieve to the petitioner in pursuance of order dated 28.08.2022 (Annex.2). B) By an appropriate writ order or direction, the condition no.11 imposed in the order dated 28.08.2022 may kindly be declared illegal. C) By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to decide the petitioner’s representation (Annex.5) in accordance with law.

¶18

D) Any other appropriate order which is deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be also passed in favour of the petitioner.”

[2024:RJ-JD:757]

[CW-2533/2023]

(2 of 4)

Succinct facts first.

¶23

2.1 The petitioner was appointed as Senior Teacher Grade II (Mathematics). He was subsequently posted at Government Senior Secondary School Salumber Udaipur, as per the order dated July 2, 2019. The petitioner has been continuously serving in the TSP area.

¶24

2.2 The petitioner sought transfer from Mahatma Gandhi Senior Secondary School (English Medium), Chittorgarh, to Government Senior Secondary School Naka Madar Ajmer. The transfer order was issued on February 28, 2022. Despite the petitioner's consent that no TA/DA was required from the respondents, the authorities have not relieved the petitioner from the previous school. The petitioner's name appears at Sr. no. 41 in the said order.

¶25

2.3 The petitioner approached the respondents and the District Education Officer wrote a letter to the Joint Director requesting to relieve the petitioner to join at the transferred location; however, no action has been taken by the respondent/Director.

¶26

2.4. Hence, this writ petition.

¶27

I have the rival arguments in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts.

¶28

The writ petition is primarily opposed on two grounds: (A) the petitioner, being an appointee at Mahatma Gandhi School, cannot be transferred/deputed to any other Government School of the State Government; (B) as an appointee in the TSP area, the petitioner cannot be posted in a Non-TSP area.

¶29

Addressing the second argument first, a perusal of the administrative order dated February 28, 2022 (Annex.2), which facilitated multiple transfers of various teachers, including the

[2024:RJ-JD:757]

[CW-2533/2023]

(3 of 4)

petitioner, from TSP areas to Non-TSP areas, contradicts the assertion that a teacher from a TSP area cannot be posted in a Non-TSP area.

¶34

The respondents cannot on their own simultaneously transfer teachers between TSP and Non-TSP areas, and yet contest the petitioner's request for transfer just because he has sought so. Such inconsistency undermines their argument.

¶35

Adverting now to the first argument, it suffices to note that a Coordinate Bench of this Court, presided over by my learned Brother Arun Bhansali, J., has already adjudicated clause 10 (in SBCWP No. 19426/2022), which stipulated that services of a teacher from Mahatma Gandhi School cannot be transferred to any other Government School. This clause was set aside, and the judgment has attained finality as no further legal recourse has been pursued by the respondents. Relevant extract of the same is reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶36

“11. Further the very fact that the respondents have choose to pass the order dated 10.10.2022 ordering for transfer of the petitioner appending of the note at the end restricting the said transfer, clearly indicates acceptance by the respondents of the fact that the orders of transfer are being passed without application of mind, as they have themselves chosen to pass the order of a Teacher teaching in English Medium School to a General School and at the end indicating that if such a transfer has been made, he would not be relieved, clearly shows utter disregard for their own orders, wherein, on the one hand, transfer have been made and on the other hand, the same is sought to be taken back, as if the order of transfer has been made by some mechanical process, without application of mind, which aspect cannot be countenanced.

¶37

In view of the above fact situation, where there is neither any restriction nor anything has been placed on record as well as nothing has been indicated in the order dated 20.07.2023, restricting the transfer from English Medium School to General School, the Clause

(4 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:757]

[CW-2533/2023]

11 appended to the order of transfer cannot be sustained.”

¶42

Clause-11 referred in the judgment ibid is pari materia with clause-10 in the case of the petitioner herein and, therefore, I see no reason as to why the petitioner be not accorded the benefit of aforesaid judgment.

¶43

The writ petition is accordingly allowed.

¶44

The respondents are directed to either implement their order dated 28.08.2022 (Annex.2) and/or pass fresh order by posting the petitioner within district Ajmer, as per the administrative exigencies, as was earlier done vide order dated 22.08.2022 (Annex.2).

¶45

(ARUN MONGA),J

¶46

1-Sumit/-

¶47

Whether Fit for Reporting: Yes / No

Inder Mohan Singh Chhabra v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inder Mohan Singh Chhabra v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Shekhar Tripathi Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhanupriya Kanwar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Nirma Vishnoi Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Raj. and Anr. Vs Indra Saini

Rajendra Prasad Joshi Vs State and Anr.