Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1236/2010 4/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1236 of 2010
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=============================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=============================================================
DEVYANIBEN
RAMESHBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PANKAJ K SONI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR RA RINDANI, LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
MR BIPIN BHATT for Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 09/03/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1.0 By
way of present petition, the petitioner
has inter alia prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned
order of transfer dated 20th January 2010 at Annexure-A
and directing the respondent No.3 to transfer the petitioner
back to the original place at Prantiya Primary School.
2.0 The
brief facts leading to filing of the present petition are as under :
2.1 The
petitioner
has been serving as a Teacher since 11th January 1984.
Earlier she had served at Limbadiya Primary School, Taluka and
District Gandhinagar. Thereafter, she was transferred at Otajina
Chhapra and on 26th June 1996 she was transferred to
Prantiya Primary School. Thereafter, the petitioner
was transferred at Isanpur Mota. On 11th February 2007,
the petitioner
was transferred back to Prantiya Primary School. Thereafter, vide
impugned order, the respondent No.3 transferred the petitioner
to Jethluj Primary School, which is at a distance of about 60 kms.
from the residence of the petitioner.
Hence, this petition.
3.0 Mr.Pankaj
Soni, learned
advocate for the petitioner,
has relied upon the grounds raised in the petition and submitted that
the impugned order of transfer is against the principles of natural
justice. It is submitted that with some ill-will or ill-motive the
petitioner
has been transferred by the respondent No.3 by way of some monetary
gain.
3.1 It
is submitted that the respondent No.3 has failed to consider the fact
that the petitioner
has been suffering from the disease of kidney failure and the medical
treatment in that respect is going on. Further, it has not been
considered that the petitioner
is suffering from gynaec diseases. The respondent No.3 has also
failed to consider that the widow mother-in-law of the petitioner,
who resides with her, is also suffering from old age diseases. Hence,
it is submitted that the present petition is required to be allowed
by quashing and setting aside the impugned order.
4.0 Mr.R.A.
Rindani, the learned Assistant Government Pleader has submitted that
the order passed by the respondent No.3 is just and proper. There is
no illegality or perversity in the order passed by the respondent
No.3. Further, it is submitted that the order impugned in the
petition is an administrative order which is passed with a view to
maintaining the decorum of the School Administration. Hence, the
present petition is required to be rejected.
5.0 Having
considered the rival contentions advanced by the learned
advocates for the respective parties and the documents
on record, it transpires that one preliminary report dated 13th
October 2009 was filed by the Bit Education Inspector. In pursuance
of the said preliminary report, the Deputy District Education Officer
submitted his report on 03rd December 2009 and the order
impugned in the petition has been passed by the respondent No.3 after
taking into consideration the said preliminary report as well as the
report filed by the Deputy District Education Officer. It is
pertinent to note that the action of the respondent No.3 in
transferring the petitioner
to Jethluj Primary School from Prantiya Primary School is just and
proper since the said order is passed with a view to avoiding further
penal proceedings to be initiated against the petitioner.
It is pertinent to note that the said order is passed as an
administrative measure and it is not appropriate for this Court to
interfere with any administrative orders passed by the respondent
No.3. Further, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order
passed by the respondent No.3 and, therefore, I do not find it
necessary to interfere with the order impugned since the same is
passed in accordance with law. I am in complete agreement with the
reasons assigned by the respondent No.3 while passing the said order.
Hence, the present petition is required to be dismissed.
6.0 In
view of aforesaid, the present petition fails and is, accordingly,
dismissed. Notice is discharged with no order as to costs.
(K.S.
Jhaveri, J)
Aakar
Top