WP(C) 149/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.MADAN B. LOKUR According to the petitioner, she is working as a Subject Teacher in Jorh at and, as such, she is entitled to be transferred to Barpeta where her husband is also working as a teacher. In support of her case, the petitioner relies upon an Office Memorandum dated 28th October, 2003 which permits inter-district transfers on certain groun ds. According to the petitioner, she falls within the grounds mentioned in the s aid Office Memorandum. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the tran sfer of the petitioner has been recommended both by the Principal of her School as well as by the Inspector of Schools. It is stated by learned counsel that whe n the request for transfer was made, the vacant post in the Bajali HS School had not been advertised. Since the transfer of the petitioner was not favourably considered by th e respondents, the present writ petition was filed. On 11.1.2011, an interim order was passed to the effect that if the post of Subject Teacher of History in Bajali HS School in Barpeta has not been fille d up, it shall not be filled up. It appears that the post has been lying vacant for the last three years and learned counsel for the petitioner says that the post has still not been fil led up. Keeping a post of a Subject Teacher vacant does not serve any public pu rpose whatsoever. It is, therefore, necessary for the respondents to take a decision in th e matter urgently so that the education of the students in Barpeta as well as in Jorhat does not suffer. The respondents have filed an affidavit in which it is stated that in te rms of Rule 25(2)(v) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation of Serv ices) Rules, 2003, the petitioner has not given an undertaking that she will giv e her claim for seniority upon her transfer to Barpeta. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client is not interes ted is maintaining her seniority and will forgo her seniority. The petitioner wi ll abide by the statement made by her learned counsel at the Bar. In any event, the petitioner will also within a week furnish an undertak ing as is required by the respondents so that the record is complete. In view of the above facts, I am of the opinion that the appropriate cou rse is to direct the respondents to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner one way or the other in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 28th Oc tober, 2003 keeping in mind the interest of the students in Barpeta as well as i n Jorhat since there is no point in keeping a unwilling teacher in Jorhat. The respondents are directed to take a decision within a period of three weeks from today and, in any case, on or before 31st August, 2011. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.