शासन द्वारा सीधे किये गए अंतर्जनपदीय ट्रांसफर आदेशों पर उच्च न्यायालय ने लगाई रोक, सेवा नियमावली 1981 एवं स्थानांतरण नीति के विरुद्ध बताया : देखें कोर्ट का आदेश
शासन द्वारा सीधे किये गए अंतर्जनपदीय ट्रांसफर आदेशों पर उच्च न्यायालय ने लगाई रोक, सेवा नियमावली 1981 एवं स्थानांतरण नीति के विरुद्ध बताया : देखें कोर्ट का आदेश
Court No. - 7
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 333 of 2017
Petitioner :- Mohd. Arif And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy.Basic Edu.Govt.Of Up
Lucknow & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishan Kanhaya Pal,Pooja Pal
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manish Mishra
connected with
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 489 of 2017
Petitioner :- Manju Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Edu.Basic Civil
Sectt.Lko.&Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar
and
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 587 of 2017
Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Bajpai & Ors
Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru Secy Basic Edu Lko & Ors
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manjive Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Manish Mishra,Rajiv Singh
Chauhan
and
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 795 of 2017
Petitioner :- Faheem Beg
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Basic Edu.Civil
Sectt.Lko.&Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Karunesh Singh Pawar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar,Manish Mishra
Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J.
Pursuant to order dated 25.01.2017, Sri D.P.Singh, Special
Secretary, Department of Basic Education is present. He has
stated that after issuance of the Government Order dated
23.06.2016, the State Government has issued another
Government Order dated 19.12.2016 providing therein that in
terms of the earlier transfer policy embodied in the Government
Order dated 23.06.2016, the remaining on-line application
forms submitted by the teachers seeking their inter-district
transfers can be considered in terms of the earlier policy itself.
The Government Order dated 19.12.2016 is taken on record.
However, on a query being put to him as to whether before
passing the transfer order dated 03.01.2017 whereby several
inter-district transfers of the teachers has been effected, prior
approval of the Basic Education Board, as is required to be
taken under Rule 21 of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service
Rules, 1981, was taken or not, it has been stated by Sri
D.P.Singh, Special Secretary that no such approval was sought
before passing the order dated 03.01.2017.
Such a course adopted by the State Government while passing
the transfer order on 03.01.2017 is not only against the statutory
provisions contained in Rule 21 of the aforesaid Rules but is
also in violation of the Government Order dated 23.06.2016.
It is noticeable that the Government Order dated 19.12.2016
permitted consideration of remaining on-line applications only
in terms of the Government Order dated 23.06.2016 and as such
without seeking approval of the Basic Education Board, no such
inter-district transfers could have been effected.
At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated
that it is not only that only one order on 03.01.2017 effecting
several inter-district transfers of teachers was passed but there
are several such orders.
Learned Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions
received from Special Secretary present today has stated that in
fact on 03.01.2017 two orders effecting several inter-district
transfers of teachers have been passed by the State
Government. He has also stated that these two orders passed on
03.01.2017 contain lists of teachers most of whom had
submitted off-line applications, which was impermissible under
the Rules and the Government Order.
Such a procedure of effecting inter-district transfer is neither
contemplated in Rule 21 of the Rules nor in the Government
Order dated 23.06.2016.
This bunch of writ petitions contain averments that while
effecting inter-district transfers of teachers, the Basic Education
Board and the respective Basic Shiksha Adhikaris have not
followed the priority as contemplated in the Government Order
dated 23.06.2016. There appears to be large scale discrepancies
in the inter-district transfers made by the respondents.
Any statute or statutory Rules or even a Government Policy is
binding on the Government as much as it is binding on others.
The facts of this case clearly establish that State Government
has acted against its own norms which are embodied in the
Service Rules, 1981 and the Government order dated
23.06.2016. Further, despite prescribing that only on-line
applications seeking inter-district transfer shall be considered,
the State Government while passing at least two orders on
03.01.2017 has considered off-line applications of teachers and
passed orders thereon, which has not only resulted in making
the process adopted by the Government non-transparent but has
also deprived several teachers of the opportunity of making
applications. Such a course adopted by the State Government
is, thus, prima facie, arbitrary and also suffers from the vice of
malice in law as prima facie there is no justification for
deviation from the prescribed norms.
Accordingly, till further orders of this Court, operation and
implementation of these two orders said to have been issued by
the State Government on 03.01.2017 effecting inter-district
transfers of the teachers in Primary and Junior High Schools in
the State of U.P. are hereby stayed.
The teachers who have been transferred in terms of the said
orders will not be allowed to work and discharge their duties at
the places of their new posting. They shall, however, be
permitted to discharge their duties in the schools where they
have been working prior to passing of the orders on 03.01.2017
by the State Government.
Let counter affidavit be filed in these matters by the
respondents within a period of two weeks. One week's time
thereafter shall be available to learned counsel for the
petitioners to file rejoinder affidavit.
List after expiry of the aforesaid period showing the name of
Sri Upendra Nath Mishra as counsel for the respondent.
It will be open to the teachers who are affected by the order
passed on 03.01.2017 by the State Government to seek their
intervention in this case.
Order Date :- 27.1.2017
Court No. - 7
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 333 of 2017
Petitioner :- Mohd. Arif And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy.Basic Edu.Govt.Of Up
Lucknow & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishan Kanhaya Pal,Pooja Pal
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manish Mishra
connected with
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 489 of 2017
Petitioner :- Manju Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Edu.Basic Civil
Sectt.Lko.&Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar
and
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 587 of 2017
Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Bajpai & Ors
Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru Secy Basic Edu Lko & Ors
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manjive Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Manish Mishra,Rajiv Singh
Chauhan
and
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 795 of 2017
Petitioner :- Faheem Beg
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Basic Edu.Civil
Sectt.Lko.&Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Karunesh Singh Pawar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar,Manish Mishra
Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J.
Pursuant to order dated 25.01.2017, Sri D.P.Singh, Special
Secretary, Department of Basic Education is present. He has
stated that after issuance of the Government Order dated
23.06.2016, the State Government has issued another
Government Order dated 19.12.2016 providing therein that in
terms of the earlier transfer policy embodied in the Government
Order dated 23.06.2016, the remaining on-line application
forms submitted by the teachers seeking their inter-district
transfers can be considered in terms of the earlier policy itself.
The Government Order dated 19.12.2016 is taken on record.
However, on a query being put to him as to whether before
passing the transfer order dated 03.01.2017 whereby several
inter-district transfers of the teachers has been effected, prior
approval of the Basic Education Board, as is required to be
taken under Rule 21 of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service
Rules, 1981, was taken or not, it has been stated by Sri
D.P.Singh, Special Secretary that no such approval was sought
before passing the order dated 03.01.2017.
Such a course adopted by the State Government while passing
the transfer order on 03.01.2017 is not only against the statutory
provisions contained in Rule 21 of the aforesaid Rules but is
also in violation of the Government Order dated 23.06.2016.
It is noticeable that the Government Order dated 19.12.2016
permitted consideration of remaining on-line applications only
in terms of the Government Order dated 23.06.2016 and as such
without seeking approval of the Basic Education Board, no such
inter-district transfers could have been effected.
At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated
that it is not only that only one order on 03.01.2017 effecting
several inter-district transfers of teachers was passed but there
are several such orders.
Learned Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions
received from Special Secretary present today has stated that in
fact on 03.01.2017 two orders effecting several inter-district
transfers of teachers have been passed by the State
Government. He has also stated that these two orders passed on
03.01.2017 contain lists of teachers most of whom had
submitted off-line applications, which was impermissible under
the Rules and the Government Order.
Such a procedure of effecting inter-district transfer is neither
contemplated in Rule 21 of the Rules nor in the Government
Order dated 23.06.2016.
This bunch of writ petitions contain averments that while
effecting inter-district transfers of teachers, the Basic Education
Board and the respective Basic Shiksha Adhikaris have not
followed the priority as contemplated in the Government Order
dated 23.06.2016. There appears to be large scale discrepancies
in the inter-district transfers made by the respondents.
Any statute or statutory Rules or even a Government Policy is
binding on the Government as much as it is binding on others.
The facts of this case clearly establish that State Government
has acted against its own norms which are embodied in the
Service Rules, 1981 and the Government order dated
23.06.2016. Further, despite prescribing that only on-line
applications seeking inter-district transfer shall be considered,
the State Government while passing at least two orders on
03.01.2017 has considered off-line applications of teachers and
passed orders thereon, which has not only resulted in making
the process adopted by the Government non-transparent but has
also deprived several teachers of the opportunity of making
applications. Such a course adopted by the State Government
is, thus, prima facie, arbitrary and also suffers from the vice of
malice in law as prima facie there is no justification for
deviation from the prescribed norms.
Accordingly, till further orders of this Court, operation and
implementation of these two orders said to have been issued by
the State Government on 03.01.2017 effecting inter-district
transfers of the teachers in Primary and Junior High Schools in
the State of U.P. are hereby stayed.
The teachers who have been transferred in terms of the said
orders will not be allowed to work and discharge their duties at
the places of their new posting. They shall, however, be
permitted to discharge their duties in the schools where they
have been working prior to passing of the orders on 03.01.2017
by the State Government.
Let counter affidavit be filed in these matters by the
respondents within a period of two weeks. One week's time
thereafter shall be available to learned counsel for the
petitioners to file rejoinder affidavit.
List after expiry of the aforesaid period showing the name of
Sri Upendra Nath Mishra as counsel for the respondent.
It will be open to the teachers who are affected by the order
passed on 03.01.2017 by the State Government to seek their
intervention in this case.
Order Date :- 27.1.2017
शासन द्वारा सीधे किये गए अंतर्जनपदीय ट्रांसफर आदेशों पर उच्च न्यायालय ने लगाई रोक, सेवा नियमावली 1981 एवं स्थानांतरण नीति के विरुद्ध बताया : देखें कोर्ट का आदेश
Reviewed by sankalp gupta
on
11:00 PM
Rating:
Reviewed by sankalp gupta
on
11:00 PM
Rating:
No comments:
Post a Comment