IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7956 of 2010 Rita Devi w/o Rajkumar Ram, Member, Shikha Samity, Haspura Primary Vidyalay, resident of village & P. O. –Haspura, P. S. Haspura Deh, District – Aurangabad. …. Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Secretary, Human Resources Department, Bihar 3. Director, Primary Education, Bihar. 4. District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad. 5. District Education Officer, Aurangabad. 6. Block Education Extension Officer, Haspura … Respondents. -------- For the petitioner : Mr. R. K. Shrivastava, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sheo Jee Prasad, G. P. 2 : Mr. Ranjan KumarSingh, A. C. to G.P.2 ----------- 2. 06.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner claiming to be a member of Shiksha Samiti Haspura Primary School has made the following prayer; “1. That this Public Interest Litigation petition is for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs to command the respondent authorities by directing them to post Mena Kumari, Primary Teacher any where instead of posting her at Haspura Primary Vidyalya in the interest of the villagers at large by implementing the decision taken by Haspura Primary Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti in terms of Section 10 (6) of Bihar Rajya Vidyalay Shiksha Samiti Adhineam 2000 as contained in Annexure-6 or pass any other order or orders as may be deem fit in the facts and circumstances.” 2 Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the continuation of Mena Kumari as a primary school teacher in Haspura Primary School would be against the interest of students and teaching atmosphere and as such the respondent-authorities are under obligation to consider the resolution passed by the Shiksha Samiti of Primary School Haspura for transferring the aforesaid Mena Kumari to any other school. Counsel for the State points out that the petitioner has made some personal allegations against the aforesaid Mena Kumari, teacher in Primary School Haspura without impleading her as a party to the writ petition. He further submits that the incident in question of the date of 16.11.2005 cannot be raised by the writ petitioner after more than four years for getting the said Mena Kumari transferred. In reply, Mr. Shrivastava would submit that the petitioner has got nothing personal against Mena Kumari rather her sole interest while representing Shiksha Samiti is to ensure a free and fair teaching atmosphere in 3 the school which had been partly affected on account of some serious allegation against said Mena Kumari. In this context, he has placed reliance on the report dated 22.12.2006 of the concerned Block Education Extension Officer, Haspura addressed to the District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad wherein though he had found no substance in the allegation against Mena Kumari, he had commended for her transfer on the ground that she was having some relationship with a male teacher of the same school. He has also placed reliance on an order of deputation dated 9.3.2007 whereby and whereunder Mena Kumari was sought to be deputed in middle school , Itawah. It appears that such order of deputation was subsequently cancelled by an order of the District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad dated 26.8.2008 whereby and whereunder all orders of deputation of teachers in the District were cancelled with a direction that they are to report back to their parents school. In fact, it appears that when the said order dated 26.8.2008 was implemented also in the case of Mena Kumari, Shiksha 4 Samiti of the school had passed the resolution for removing her from Primary School Haspura on 3.4.2010. In the opinion of this Court, while it is true that academic atmosphere of the school should remain unpolluted and the teachers should be ideal for the young students, but then the group rivalry or village politics should also be kept at equal distance from the arena of school. This Court is not aware nor can it make any pronouncement on the allegations made against the said teacher of primary school namely, Mena Kumari specially when she has not even been impleaded as a party to the writ petition in which the relief actually has been sought against her. In such circumstances, this Court would place no reliance on the allegation made by the petitioner against said Mena Kumari. At the same time, as the Shiksha Samiti of the school has passed certain resolution for transferring Mena Kumari from Primary School Haspura, it would be augur well for an efficient administration to look into this aspect as to whether the continuation of Mena Kumar as a teacher of the school would be detrimental to the academic 5 atmosphere and interest of the school in question i.e. Primary School, Haspura. This Court would, accordingly, direct the petitioner to file a compact representation before a competent authority which would look into the whole issue with an independent mind, without being influenced by anything said in this writ petition and if it is found that the allegations against Mena Kumari are also concocted, such representation of the petitioner would be rejected. But if on the other hand it is found that there is any semblance of truth that her continuance in the school would be detrimental to the academic interest of the school, the competent authority may take appropriate decision for transferring her to some nearby school against a vacant sanctioned post. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not gone into the merit of the allegations made by the petitioner against Mena Kumari, lady teacher of Primary School, Haspura and has left the matter to be decided by the competent authority. Such decision, however, must be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6 With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)