Q) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WRIT PETITION NOJ^£J OF 2006 BfTO PETITIONER ,^^ '..••c^'s-"" .-•••"" ^•^"..••-^ ...-••""&^>"" ^^""" ^ RESPONDENTS /''^s^k y. ^—^ '^ & " */•" \ "' y9rte3^4 '^. •-. f^ ' ..: '^- ^' .."•°/' .'•'/ Smt. Kunti Tiwari, aged about 42 years, W/o Shri S.B. Tiwari, Upper Division Teacher, -Posted at Government Higher Secondary School Saragbundiya, District Korba (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner, - Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Welfare Department, Raipur C.G. 3. The Collector, Korba District Korba (C.G.) 4. The Assistant Commissioner, * Tribal Welfare Department, DistrictKorba (C.G.) 5. The Principal, f- Government Higher Secondary School, Saragbundiya, District -J»fc Korba (C.G.) ffi ^, 6. Vijay Kumar Soni, ' -• ^ Upper Division Teaoher, Higher Secondary School Saragbundiya, District Korba, C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS^CERTIQRARI ETC. OR DIRECTIONyORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. XI-HC-78 *(W^tlSt»qT9> 3^ •^i'tK'i'ii, aTny'is, Rwiuy rr^^f. Hy..^.' i P.^ ^r 200 311^1 wv> ('i^y^ft) Sn^TqiT^i* awsn^rsti^i'b ?BTTWflfer3D^T +i'iifri41-< HiiciTffte^t<p]<^i< ^sri^itTsn^T 119.7,; ioher- under Hecrd Shri Rckesh Pcndey, Shri Sumesh BsJGJ,Sovernmen| [advonce copy. By this petition, the petitiofi P'aachsr (U&T) in £overnmentHighsr |<orbo, hos questioned ths legality & ".7.2006 (Annexurs P-1) issued povernmsnt of Chhcttisgar'h, Schedui pec-Qrtment, Raipur. The grounds of chsiienge of tf^i p-hat the Secretsry or ths Under mpugnsd trcnsfer order, as the Itrsnsfe," ordsrs uridsr the RctionQlizt' B'he impucined transfer order- issued ^ind nul!ity in ths eyes of Isw. Tne Stcj ^owers of tronsferring the tei3chers| ^he Ststs levei under' the r{ri'ionc!ii mpU9nsd transfer order has been issp bontsinsd in Paras 5 <& 6 of this rction<3 Perusc! of impuqrisd ordsr' fcieen transferred cs also the rationaiil p'he petition is misconceived, for the; ^uhich the petitionsr has been transf^ ^rounds. This order has not besn dp Ad'liocme icste for the petitioner. Advoeote for the respondents/Stste on who is workin9 as Upper &ivision pecondary Schooi, Sarsgbundiyc, ESistrict itorrectnsss of her- transfer order datad the signQture of Under Secrstsry, i^d Casts ,& Scheduled Tribe Deveiopment Ijs order, as raised by tha petitioner', crs hos no jurisdiction to poss the Iselling Committee is enspowered to issue Scheme dated 1.6.2006, therefore, respondsnt No.l is without jurisdiction i-e Sovsrnwsm has alrssdy deiegcted tha |to counseliing committee constituted at kation scheme dcted l.6.2006 and ths in flagrant violation of ths provisions lization scheme, P-3. ishsreby the petitioner has kation scheme dated 1.6.2006 shows thct reasons that tha impugned or'der' unde" ^rred has been passed on administratiye lassed under the rationslization scheme Courtsel izttion b|y issbed Arlnexura ttass P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3ST-^raRTO, 8^11^18, latdl'My tfTH^I Sb*1|ch W1T 200 311^,'t 4a<n (liciI^°"<.iT) 3Tl^TqiTRRT?i (W 3TI^?T StlH WctTWflfwW^T t]|<il<'i<f1-< W^f if fs'S <(»I«K ^srf^iTa'n^T sch^me inforibation dated 1.6.2006 snd the same has beeA genera! powers to transfer itsempio^ Perusal of rctionclizotion sccount of transfsrs, promotions & r| become irrationa! in various sehoolsl where on account of abova mentiot tsschers have become isss 1 or 2 exeeeded more than the required concerned department, as envisgged i committee and ofter collectinq inforiti schools or middie sehools or primar^ rctionaiize the numbers of tecchers students. It hss been eim'ssaged thi( primary schooi r-emain less thcn two •} than three teachers, in case of hlqh case of h;9her secondar'y school not i^ As hss been msntioned esr'iierl under the odministrative powers of and this order has nothing to do l.6.2006. Tne Sovarnment 'is clways ^ the irstroduction of rationclization s^ concernsd depsrtment of the State its teachers in the administratlve exitl s bare perusal of the petition show\ petition that by this transfer in s pQi( psssed by the Government in exercise of fees. dcted 1.6.2006 shows that whsrs on fetirements the numbers of teachers hsve iookin9 t° the numbers of students i.e. fned recsons in one schooi numbers of tr where the numbers of teachers have |numbers of teaehers, in thct case the ^i the schema, wil! constitute o counseiiing •i^ation from the various higher secondsry schools, the coneerned committse shail |n eoch schools iooking to the numbers of |st the con'mittee is to ensure that in no (sachers, in case of middie schooi not iass Ischoo! not iess thcn four teochers and in fcss than six teQchers. thcrt the impugned order has been pssssd 6ove"nment on administr'ative grounds with the rationalization scheme dated ^mpowered to transfer its smployees and j;heme does not create any bar thst the ^overnment is not empowered to transfer |ency or in the publie interest. Mor'eover', t that it has not been mentioned in the ^ticular higher secondsry schooi numbers P.T.O. ths XI-HC-78 'S^ '^l^lld'il, ®Tfly'16,Rfcliuy *11*1<»11 Sh*1icb ^ 200 an^Tyacn (ytt^qi^eT) sn^rwtera; craTan^TshHiqi ?•} ^y,c>sL^.'\f' ,^>f" eTgTm^fersn^T •y of teachers has become less thsnl numbers of tecchers have exceed^ Tnerefor'e, the petition of the petit that; (1) the order impugned has bee| Sovernment to transfer ;ts has not been passed under dsted 1.6.2006. (2) in the petition it hcs not bea the principle enunciated ii violated i.e. on sccount of th| become less thcn the re^ Lhe required numbers of teachers or |d looking to the numbers of students. loner is not maintainable for the recsons ^ psssed under the generai powers of the ^mployees on administrative ground and it Ihe said scheme i.e. rationaiization scheme llft rationslization scheme or contrary to the rstionaiizsti (3) Jhs ar'eas of operation of t and of 9enersl powers of ti However, if any such instanc^ then she wiil be at iiberty to make a r In view of the above, the petit Consequently, M.(W.)P. No.27E °hi<iF«41-<Ki*iciTttte^t<Rit<;i< ^srf^TTsn^r jn alieged that on account of this transfsr the rOTionolization scheme hos been |s transfsr the numbsrs of tsachers have luired numbers of teachers under the |iave exeseded in any psrticulai* sehool i|on scheme. rationalizction scheme dated 1.6.2006 cfrisfsr of Stcts Sovernment ars different. :t comes to the notice of the petitioner, ^presentation to the authority concerned. lon stand dismissed. 15/06 aiso stands dismissed. ~- ^ Tne Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge P.T.O.