IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP Nos. 4795 of 2009, 4232 & 3446 of 2010. Decided on: October 20, 2010. 1. CWP No. 4795 of 2009 Yojna Thakur. …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ….Respondents. 2. CWP No. 4232 of 2010 Asha Garg. …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ….Respondents. 3. CWP No. 3446 of 2010 Ms. Kartik S. Mrityumjay …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioner(s): Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate, in CWP No. 4795 of 2009, Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Advocate, in CWP No. 4232 of 2010 and Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate, in CWP No. 3446 of 2010. For the Respondents: Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. for the respondents-State. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate, for respondent No. 2 in CWP No. 4232 of 2010. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) These three writ petitions pertain to the transfer of teachers from Government College, Rampur. In CWP No. 3446 of 2010. The grievance of the petitioner-Kartik is that she is a regular teacher and she cannot be transferred for accommodating contract teachers. No doubt, the petitioner has completed around 12 years in the same place. But the contention of the petitioner is that the transfer is only to accommodate 2 fresh appointees on contract basis. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is not pressed since the impugned order of transfer has since been cancelled. Accordingly, CWP No. 3446 of 2010 is dismissed as not pressed. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in CWP No. 4232 of 2010, Asha Garg is that she has been appointed in a regular vacancy in the college and she is entitled to be there for a period of five years, in any case, unless she opts for a transfer. It is also submitted that she is in the family way. Her apprehension is that she is being transferred so as to retain a PTA teacher. 3. The grievance of the petitioner in CWP No. 4795 of 2009, namely, Yojna Thakur is that when there are vacant posts available in the college, it is not necessary to disengage her on the only ground that she is a PTA teacher. Still further, it is submitted that the newly appointed contract teachers can be accommodated in any of the vacant places so that the petitioner who has been working as PTA for around five years can be continued until she is replaced by a regular teacher, after exhausting all other available vacancies. 4. Having heard learned counsel appearing for all the parties, we are of the view that the matter requires consideration by the first respondent-Secretary. No doubt, a PTA teacher has no lien on the post and such engagement as PTA teacher is only an ad hoc arrangement. But even then, in case there is a vacancy available to accommodate the regular-contract teacher, it is not necessary to disengage the PTA teacher, particularly since the PTA teacher can work only in the particular school/college whereas regular-contract teachers can work elsewhere. Therefore, it is only appropriate that the issue is considered in the light of the availability of vacancies so as to accommodate the regular-contract teachers who were appointed for the first time. In the process, we make it clear that as far as possible the petitioner in CWP No. 4232 of 2010, namely, Asha Garg may not be disturbed since it is submitted that she is in 3 the family way and disturbance at this stage would cause her severe hardship. It will be open to the petitioners in the two writ petitions and private respondents to submit their grievances by way of appropriate representations before the Secretary within a period of two weeks from today. The Secretary will pass appropriate orders in the matter, adverting to the submissions made in the representations, in accordance with law within another two weeks. The interim orders passed by this Court in all the cases will continue till orders are passed, as above by the Secretary. 5. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. October 20, 2010. ( Justice Kuldip Singh ), (karan/vs) Judge.