Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 69472 of 2009 Petitioner :- Chatra Pal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Indal Singh,Ravi Shankar Mishra Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C.,Chandra Narayan Tripathi Hon'ble Sanjay Misra,J.
Heard Sri Indal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The petitioner alleges to be an Assistant Teacher in Science
subject in Junior High School, Mohammadpur Block Bahariya.
Primarily, the grievance is against the transfer of the petitioner
from Junior High School, Mohammadpur, Block Bahariya to
Junior High School, Kirao, as also the order dated 17.11.2009
(Annexure-10 to the Writ Petition) whereby the representation of
the petitioner has been turned down by the Basic Siksha Parishad.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that under the
instruction a Junior High School must have one Head Master, one
teacher in language and one teacher in Science subject and further
a teacher in Science subject of a Junior High School should not be
transferred as Head Master of a primary school. The petitioner
alleges violation of the first instruction referred to above by saying
that upon the transfer of petitioner from Junior High School,
Mohammadpur, Block Bahariya to Junior High School, Kirao, the
Junior High School, Mohammadpur, Block Bahariya, is now left
with no Science teacher, therefore, he ought not to have been
transferred. The second contention is that one Smt. Asha Singh
was mentioned in the list dated 31.07.2009 at Serial No.129 to be
posted/adjusted at Junior High School, Kirao, but by the order
dated 17.08.2009 (Annexure No.4 to the writ petition) the Basic
Siksha Adhikari, Allahabad, has made a correction and placed the
petitioner in place of Smt. Asha Singh and as such the same is also
illegal and cannot be upheld.
Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the
petitioner and upon perusal of the record it appears that in Junior
High School, Kirao, there is a Head Master, a teacher in language
subject and the petitioner as teacher for Science subject. In the
impugned order dated 17.11.2009 it was found that there were four
teachers working in Junior High School, Mohammadpur, Block
Bahariya, and the petitioner being the senior most having stayed
for the longest period was transferred to Junior High School, Kirao
as Science teacher. Consequently, insofar as the Junior High
School, Kirao, is concerned it has a Head Master, it has a teacher
in language and it has the petitioner as teacher for Science subject.
The submission that by transferring the petitioner the Junior High
School at Mohammadpur, Block Bahariya, does not have a
Science teacher is not a ground to interfere in the order of
adjustment of teachers at Junior High School, Kirao.
Consequently, insofar as the above submission is concerned it
cannot help the petitioner in any manner in challenging the
impugned order as also the order whereby the petitioner had been
adjusted at Junior High School, Kirao.
Insofar as the other submission of the petitioner that by the order
dated 17.08.2009 correction has been made illegally in the list
dated 31.07.2009 is concerned, this Court finds that Smt. Asha
Singh was a teacher in language and by the order dated 31.07.2009
she was sent to Junior High School, Kirao, which then had two
teachers of language and no teacher of Science subject.
Consequently, the list dated 31.07.2009 was corrected by the Basic
Siksha Adhikari by his order dated 17.08.2009 and removed the
second language teacher from the Junior High School, Kirao and
placed the petitioner who is a Science teacher in place of Smt.
Asha Singh. The aforesaid order is in consonance with the
instructions that every Junior High School must have a Head
Master, a language teacher and a Science teacher. Consequently,
the second submission is also merit-less and cannot be upheld. The
impugned order dated 17.11.2009 has considered the instructions
issued by the Authority and its application on the dispute raised by
the petitioner and has rightly held that the representation of the
petitioner is without merit and requires to be rejected.
For the aforesaid reasons the writ petition stands dismissed.
No order is passed as to costs.
Order Date :- 7.7.2010
pks