 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO: 3680/2008 (Ku.Chandrakala D/o Baburaoji Walke vs. State of Maharashtra and four others ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. ................................................................................................................................... CORAM: D.D.SINHA & A. P. BHANGALE , JJ. DATED: 25th February, 2009. *** 1. Heard Shri A.D.Mohgaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr D P Thakare learned AGP for Respondents 1 and 2 ; Mr Anand Parchure for Respondents 3 and 4; Mr S S Murthy for Respondent no.5 and Smt. Khade for Respondent No.6. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the transfer of the petitioner was not either on the ground of administrative exigency nor at the request of the petitioner and, therefore, the said transfer order cannot be sustained in law. Similarly, the Deputy Director of Education, would not have permitted the transfer of school at Masora to Mahachandika Shikshan Sanstha, Katol without obtaining consent of the petitioner as well as other teaching and non-teaching staff and, therefore, the said action of Deputy Director of Education is also bad in law.  3. The grievance of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is twofold - one is in respect of order of transfer dated 7.7.2008 as well as transfer of Management of the School. So far as the first grievance is concerned, Mr. Parchure, learned counsel for the Respondents 3 and 4 has submitted that the Management runs two schools one is at Yenikoni and other at Masora Tah. Narkhed. It is further contended that the petitioner was working at Masora between 2003-05 and was transferred to Yenikoni only in the year 2005. It is contended that there are 72 to 75 girl students taking education in the Middle & High School at Masora and there was no lady teacher there. It is further contended that considering the necessity to have lady teacher at Masora, the Management transferred the petitioner to a school at Masora in the interest of the girl students. The transfer order is based on administrative exigency. Mr Parchure, learned counsel for the Respondents 3 and 4 further submitted that the Deputy Director of Education permitted the school run by Respondent No.3 at Masora, to be transferred to Mahachandika Shikshan Sanstha, Katol, after taking into consideration the opinion of the teaching and non-teaching staff of the school at Masora as well as Yenikoni. Since the petitioner was on leave at the relevant point, her views could not be ascertained. 4. We have considered the contentions  canvassed by the respective counsel. So far as the transfer of the petitioner from one school to another is concerned, there is no reason for us to disbelieve that the school run by the Management at Masora there was no lady teacher to teach 70 to 75 girl students. In the circumstances, the order of transfer appears to be based on administrative exigency and is sustainable in law. 5. So far as the grievance of the petitioner about the grant of permission by the Deputy Director of Education for transfer of school is concerned, it is already mentioned in the affidavit filed by the Management on oath that the opinion of the teaching and non-teaching staff of the concerned school was obtained and since the petitioner was on leave, her specific consent was not obtained. Counsel for the petitioner was unable to point out to us a specific rule which requires the Deputy Director of Education to obtain written or oral consent of the teaching and non-teaching staff of the concerned school before issuing the order of transfer of the school. It is difficult for us to appreciate as to how for want of consent of the petitioner in this regard the order of the Deputy Director of Education would be invalid. However, the petitioner is entitled to get benefits of increment, promotion etc. as per her eligibility, as and when due. 6. In the circumstances, no case is made  out for showing indulgence. Writ Petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE sahare