gagf';" ^ %^^ it^::11:i^ ig^^f::...:^ sssx |SSSiK®; •! u ^ ^ ^? ISE^SaMTISQXRH^mGHCQt^QFSUBICATUSEA'TE&^Feit ^^^^^ ^^ii;sfc^ tJii^?Ks:^;; WRnpEsmat-stio.ii/?-sof20oi 1) ChahttisgarhPradeshShikshak Congress Bilaspiir. Through : TheStateGeneral Secretary ShushU Vajpayee, Teacher's Colony, HighSehool, JagdalpuT,Distt. Bastar. ^: 's'^ .^' .^.. 2) 3) /• • . . , • ShushilVajpayee,agedabout 45 years, son ofShri S.K.Vajpayee, resident of Tea(;hers Colony, Jagdalpur. Smt. Kashna KarmHhfi^wifeofSl'iri B;^li:- Baii E^^iK'^ K !^<^^^ ^s%.:fi ..•''''B^'''^ ..•• ^y%^"^ glii^^"':4) IRS \\ ^y^^ D.N.^lEartBahe,Age56years»resideiitof t.l.-^fv^'^ Teacher'sGoliony.Jagdalptn-. ^^%^'' ..y''~.^-~-''' . • .-• 9S Smt. MayaShrivastava, wife ofShri Sunil Shrivastava, aged about 42 years, resident of Qtr No. G-5 Teacher's ;eolpny, Jagdalpur. 5) ^^ SmtSMui&liyar.wifeofShriS.S. Mudaliyar, __.aged about 57 yerars, resident of Qtr N0. G-10, Teacher's polony, Jagdalpur. /' 6) 7) N,®^'"^/\ ..,' Ru. N.B. KaaMb, daughterof Slm SulemanKaalib,agedabQut37years, resident ofQtrNo. 01, Teacher s Colony, Jagdalpur. ./" Ku. G.V.Cllhatree, daughtetpfShri C.L. Chhatree, agedab(^rt 48 years, lesidenfcfOf^Platap'G^njpara, .Jagdalpiuy ' 8& tt^ m ^s |^^!;; m/'i BSBSBi ••8®' 1^3^^^^:: IBBffS; jr 1 ^^^•<^^LJ:^;.' ^::^ ESSSIi:x: 9) 11) 12) 8) y- SmtR.S.Rao.wifeofLateShriS.N. Rao, aged about 33 years, resident of QtrNo. G-13, Teachers Colony Jagdalpur. ^. „...„ .„ „...'. ;' SBtit Sushila Vyas, wife of Shri Ratan Vyas, aged about 38 years, resident ofQtr No. G-2, Teachers colony,Jagdalpui. 10) ^Smt. Kishoiy Baieik, wife ofSbn Atari Bariek, aged about 39 years,residentof- Opposite Kisan Bakery,_^mbedkar Ward Jagdalpur. ,i>Smt. Anwaiy Rizvee, wife ofShri Abbas Ali Kban, agedabout47 years, resideat of " Teachers colony, Jagdalpur. ^9 ^" -..._--'' ""' >•'' Smt. LelchaNaidu, wife of Sbri I Sudhakar Rao, aged about 45 years, resident of Qtr No. H-15, .Maharani Ward .Fagdalpur. ) // Smt. Smrity Mishra, wife ofShri Sekhar Mishra, aged ab-out 34 years, resident ofQtr No. H-14,Maharani Ward, Jagdalpur. 14),»!iSmt.ChittraThantarate, wife ofShri Aadesh </ Thantarate, aged about 39 years, resident of QtrNO. 432, Vrindavan Cplony, Jagdalpur. VERSUS 1) /TheStateofebhattisgarhthrough Secretary, Department of School Education D.K. Mantralaya, Raipur. •a « 1 /y 2) The Director, Public Instmctions, Chhattisgarh Pension bada, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3) The Collector, Bastar at Jagdalpur, Chhatfisgarh. 4) The ChiefExecutive OfGcer, Zila Panchayat Bastar, at Jagdalpur. 5) The Asst. Director, Tnbal Welfar Department, Jagdalpur. 6) The District Education OfGGer, Distt.Bastar. SWRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF CONSTITUTION OK INDIAj'OR KiaSS®ANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OE CEKTIORARI. MANBAMUS. Ea^IfiBITIONORANYOTHER SUTTABLE WRHyWRrTSi^)RDER/G>RDERS;AND IIBKECTION/DIRECTIONS. »i,i:l'l:'iis'»'| •^Ws'i^ .?;^: •^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BIIASPUR W.P. N0. 1343 / 2001 W.P! N9. 1351 / 2001 W.P. N0. 1483 / 2001 Petitioner ChhattisgarhTratiya warg Shashkiya Karamchari. Sangh. 1 Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and ors O R D ER ( Passed on 20.8...2001 ) In the above three writ petitions transfer policy of theState goverrunsnt dated 30.6.2001 has been assailed on the ground that the same is unreasonable, un-just and arbitrary. Consequent to the issuance of the sai.ci impugned order.orders of transfer have been issued in respect of the Scho')! Teachers concerning primary schools and the Middle Schools of two d.i.stricts namely Ralpur and Ralgarh. It raay also be stated tbat as far as the teachers who are affected by ttae consequent order have not approached thls Court ( from Raipur district). However, there are several petitlons flled by the school teachers pertalning to district of Raigarh. e?i contd ^ - 2 - 2. Though various submissions have been made in favour and against the transfer policy o£ the State government in this regard even including inconveniences likely to be faced by the indivldual teachers, it appears to me that the whole question is a question of policy as regards the transfer which has besn coined as rationalisation. In order to appreciate the points involved in the present case it is necessary for ua to refar to the policy,in question. Thesaid policy is annexure P-1 in writ petition 144-3/ 2001. However, since the order has been rendered in Hindi, at my request Dr.Shukla learned Dy. Advocate General of Chhattisgarh State has pro- vided a copy randered in English langyage for my bensfit. It reada as under :- " Yuk.tiyulcta Karan " ( Rationalization ) of posting of teachers in the Govt.Schools. The Govt. o£ chhattisgarh has decided to have no school without any teacher or single taa- cher in the State. In the baakdrop o£ this decision, the postings o£ teachers in all the Oovt.Schools have to be revieired on rational basis. The needed niunber of teachers in each school has to be estimated and whereever there is a surplus of staff, they should be transferred to such schools which are understaffed as per norms. The norms / parameters for rationalization have been laid down as under :- 1. Each Primary School should essentially have atlsast 2 ( two ) teachers, slmilarly every Middle School should necessarily have 3 ( three ) teachers. 6 3 - 2) Each District should be treated as a unit for Yuktiyuktakaran ( Rationalization ) on the basis o£ total no. of students in primary schools and middle schools the TEA.CHER-TAUGHT RATIO should be worked-out. This ratio should form the basis of post- ings in a school as against the preyious criterion of considering the no. o£ posts sanctioned for a school. The no. of post sanctioned shall not be considered as basis for rationalization. Where-ever the no. of teadners is more than the average ratio estimate as psr distt.unit - the ex- cess staff should be tefansferred to such schools where there is need ( irrespective of the no. of posts sanctioned ), For example if the teacher taught ratio is 1 : 49 in any district, this ratio will form the basis for estimatiag the number of teachsrs needed and also to calculate the excess no. of teachers. . ?~t 3. The siirplus staff will be transferred within the sam6 district, preferably within the sama block or the nearby block. 4. The following guideline should form the basls for transferrlng a teacher :- A. Junior-most teachsrs only be considered as surplus liable to be transferred. B. Lady-Teachars should preferably not be transferred but whare all the teachers are women, the Junior-most should only be transferred to the nearest possible school. C. physically handicapped / seriously ill and senior teachers due to retire in a year should be left out while establishing junior^ most. If there are more than one teacher with ^^ 8. 9. 4 - the same date of appointment, he/she should be transferred who has stayed longer in the school. D. Those who have undergone trainlng for teach- ing in standard I & II from this academic session should not be transferred. Surplus tea6hers in the urban areas should be transferred to rural schools. Priority should be given to such achools which do not have teachers or have one teacher on.ly and the schools which were started'last year but which could not be provided with needed no. of teachers. If a school does not get sufficient no. of teachers even after RATIONALIZATION, then the concerned Janpad Panchayat / Grarn Panchayat should get teach- ers by pooling its own resources or by taking local assistance in this regard. It has been observed that mor than one school is being run in the same building in urban areas with siu-plus teachers. In such cases all the schools in a bullding should be taken as one unit for calcu- lation of surplus teachers and transfer thereof. Rationalization of teachers will be done by a committee of Distt. Collector, Distt.Education Officer and District Head of Tribal Welfare / Social Welfare Deptt and should have a positive approval o£ the Minister-in-charge of the District. The oarameters laid-down for rationalization should be followed strictly. By order and in 'the n-ime of oovernor of Chhattisgarh. 5 - ^ ./r/" SD/- B.K.Minz Joint Secretary Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Ministry o£ Education." In Writ Petit'ion No.,-1343 /2001 Mr. P.S.Nair appears with Mr.Manindra Shrivastava for the petitioner. As regards para 4-A of the impugned it is subroitted by the counsel representing the petitionsr that instead of Junior-most teachars being considered as surplus teachers for the pur- pose o£ transferring them from the school where they are teaching to sbme other school, it should be contrary-wise and the cases o£ senior teachers in fact should be considered for tha purpose o£ transfer. Accordingly it is sutanitted that this aspect of the matter should be looked-into by this Court in' as much as -that such policy does not appear to be reasonable and fair as there is no reasonabls rational^ for laying-down sttch policy. It is also submitted that policy to transfer teachers who are on the verge of retirement can not be said to be reasonable. In terms of policy laid-down in this regard in para 4.C the teachers who are due to retire in a year should be Isft out of this policy of transfer. It is sutanitted that normally the persons who are to retire in 2-3 years should not be touched by any policy 'y of transfer in as much as on the verge o£ retirmsnt «•»»6 1^1 • K^ 6// 6 - they need to settle their various accounts with the State Government and this can be done if they are allowed tQ continue to stay in the place of posting for 2-3 years in order to settle the accounts before their retirement. Since similar subroissions have been advanced in respect of the points which I have stated above, it appears that this matter should be dealt-with on merits at this stage. 3. After hearing Mr.P.s.,,Nair, and Mr.Manindra Shrivastava on behalf of the petitioner in writ petition No. 1343/2001, Mr.Rajiv Shrivastava in W.P.1351/2001 and Mr. P.K.C. Tiwari in W.P.No. 1483/2001 and also after hearing Mr.Ravindra Shrivastava.learned Advocate General of State of Chhattisgarh as well as Dr.N.K.Shukla learned Cy. Advocate General of the State of Chhattisgarh, I am of the v-tew that ths submissions made on behalf o£ the petitioners are reasonable in this regard,in asmuchas in my view.a blanket policy of transfer o£ the junior-Tnost teachers from one school to another would not be justifiable and reasonable. At this stage after hearing the counsel £or the parties at length, I am o£ the view that it would be just and reasonable that teachers who are to be affected by the policy o£ transfer should have rendered services at a particular instiifcution atleast for three years. As regards transferof teachers who are on the verge o£ retirement,in my view, it would be just and reasonable if they are not affected by any order o£ transfer i£ they are ...7 65- 7 - i'\ -.^ ^ to serve^for about 2-3 years before they retir^ I may however state that there may be exaeptlons where because of need o£ service exigency even in respect of the persons who ars on the verge of retirement.transfer may be effected. However.such should be an exceptipn, because of the reasons that I have recorded. In terms of para 4.B of the policy " lady teachers should not be transferred. Where all the teachers are women,the junior^most should only be transferred to the nearest possible school." Though this aspect of the policy has been assailed, I may state that taking into consideration all factors including the policy generally over the weaker sect- ions o£ the society.this aspect of the policy can not be said to be unreasonable though in case of transfer three years period should be followed gene- rally. Learned Advocate General sufcmits that thls policy pertaihing to the women teachers is fair and it miist be accepted without any modiSication. It appears to me that transfer if it becomes necessary is to be effected transferring such women teachers as far as. possible to the nearest possible schools. In other words.the policy indicates that transfer of women teachers may be aonsidered if posting is in the vicinity. This , I think, is reasonable. 4. As regards the question as to who should be transferred even among the male teachers.'it has been argued at the bar that competent authority should at all time keep the gradation list updatedso that 8 Fir ^ 8 - while issuing transfer orders they may take such list into consideration in order to find-out as to who among them has been transferred in the past and who among them should be transferred at a parti- culac time. It appears to me that this submission is also quite reasonable and I would direct that the State government should prepare the gradation list. In my view the teachers are entitled to know their respective seniority. I would direct the State government / competent authi&rity to prepare the up-dated gradation list of the school teachers in view of the present policy preferably within a period of six months. However, I shall make it clear that as far as the present pfforts to brlng abaut some transfers, such gradation list shall not stand in the way. '"'• 5. The petitioner in W.P.No. 1343/20ffl is an association of teachers of Bilaspur union. In fact, no order of transfer has bean issued in respact o£ members of this association in Bilaspur district. The writ petttioner has made a representation and the sams is pending before the Government. It appears that once t&e representation is sufcmitted,the competent authorlty is under obligation to examine such repre- sentation and dispose 6f tHe same on merit without delay. I would direct the competent authority to examine the reEaresentation submitted by the peti- tioner—union and pass necessary orders IB the light of the findings recorded by this court in the contd..9 6^ 9 - present case. I shall make it clear that the competent authority shall Independently examine the grievancas highlighted in the representations in the light of the findings recorded by this court and pass necessary orders. _This shall be done wlthin a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order. Since merit of this case has already been heard by this court.no personal hearing is necessary. 6. On a careful perusal of the pleadings filed by the parties and after hearing the counsel repre- senting the parties,it is clear that in the present case the servicea conditions of the school teachers are not at all affected. Thelr pay and allowances are not affected. Their monetary benefits of any kind as a result of their employment by the State governraent are not at all affected. There is nothing to indlcate that thetr seniority in the matter of promotional aveaues and other benefits shall be affected. If that be so, itisa question of transfer in view of the rationaligation policy in order to meet a peculiar situation that has arisen in the new state ofChhattlsgarh. I have no doubt in my mind that such policy is absolutely within the domain of the State government. Various submissions have.been made as regards the details of the student - teacher ratio and also as regards location of certain schools in rural and far flung contd....10 ^ 10 - areas of the State vis-a-vis the schooy located < in towns and citlg^of this State. It is not at all necessary for me to examine such details. It is for the competent authority to sort-out what kind of ratio of teacher and student should be maintained in the best inter^st of impartation of education in the State. I am only happy to see that the State has taken this step in right earnest. This State cane into existence w.e.f. l.11.2000. It is a good idea that new policy would have been brought iri^existance as regards school education. The infirmlty which has been potnted-out should be removed and the policy should be pressed into service. 7. At one stage it has bsen submitted by Mr. Rajiv Shrivastava that the teachers who are affected by the order of transfer have been denied normal allowances namely TA and DA. I shall make it clear that as regards this submission <;h»ti the teachers ^) who are transferred should stand entitled to their normal allowances prescribed in this regard under the relevant rules. They can not be depr4.ved o£ their entitlement without reasonablefte&s. I am happy to hear at the bar now that the State govt. during the pendency of this petition has deaided to allow normal TA and DA. 8. In my view It is for the competent authority to examJ.ne tha needs of each school and to do the needful immediately to meet such needs particularly as regards the question of transfer and posting whsther it in the rural areas or in the urban areas. ..11 <9 ^7 11 - It has been pointed-out by the counsel repre- senting the petitioners that para 8 of the policy which states that if more than one school is run in the same building in urban areas with surplus teachers.tbs school in the building should be taken as one unit for calculatlon of surplus teachers is not reasdnable• in as muah as though two schools may be in the same building.their conditions may always be different. In my view it would be reasonabla that each school is dealt-with and consi- dered separately in the matteE;'o£ application of the present policy. 3. Para 9 of the policy states " Rationalization of teachers will be done by a committee of distric-t collector.distt.Education Officer and District Head of Tritel welfare / Social Welfare department and should have a positive approval of the Ministsr-in- charge of the district." It has been argued on behalf of the petitioners that once the policy has been laid-down.there should be no room for a Minister- incharge to interfere at the time of implementation particularly with reference to transfer of school teachers. An apprehension has been raised that if positive approval of the Minister - in-charge of the district becomes necessary in the matter of transfer.there is bound to arlse nepotism.favourti.sm, and such other political influenaes which should be avoided. On careful perusal of this part of the Policy, I am o£ the view that in order to have a policy free contd.,12 ^ 12 - from political Interference and in order to have public confldence in the State policy and also to have transperancy in such a policy and particularly when in the last para of the policy it has been stated " Ahe parameters laid-down for rationalization should be followed strictly," thare appears no uti- lity to insert that there shouid be positive approval of the Minister-in-charge.in the matter of transfer. In this view of the matter I am inclined to hold that if this portion of t!-ie policy ramains.it would appear unreasonable. Therefore, this porfeiin namely " should have positive approval of the Minister-in- charge of the district" should stand deleted.as unreasonable. Henceforth such positive approval sh'll not be considered necessary in the implemeatation of the policy. 9. Mr.Tiwari submits that certain representation is pending before the government Srom the association of Bastar district.Dr.Shukla states that if there be any matter pending before the competent authority the same shall be examined and disposed o£. Let the competent authority examine and dispose of the re- presentation on merit within 10 days. In the result, in view o£ the findings, observations anel-AirsGttoiis and <3irections recorded ^ f above.these three petitions are disposed of. ' Sd/- Chiefjustice ^!