Allahabad High Court
Neelam vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 3 February, 2021
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1245 of 2021
Petitioner :- Neelam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Lakshmi Kant Trigunait,Dev Kant Trigunait
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Re-Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. Nil of 2021.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In paragraph 2 of the affidavit filed in support of the application it is stated that the petitioner, her in-laws and husband are resident of district Muzaffarnagar, therefore, she is seeking inter-district transfer from district Shamli to district Muzaffarnagar.
This application is allowed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to carry out necessary amendment in the body of the writ petition within three days.
Re-Writ Petition
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
Present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the rejection order dated 24.12.2020 passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Shamli pertaining to the transfer of the petitioner from district Shamli to district Muzaffarnagar. A further prayer in the nature of mandamus for issuance of necessary directions to consider the candidature of the petitioner for transfer from district Shamli to district Muzaffarnagar has also been made.
Challenging the rejection order where inter-district transfer of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that she had exercised option earlier, submission is that in view of the judgment of this Court rendered in the bunch of writ petitions in Divya Goswami Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others 2020 SCC Online Allahabad 1327 the petitioner is entitled to claim inter-district transfer on the ground of marriage. It was stated that when earlier this benefit was availed, the petitioner was unmarried and now she is married and her husband and in-laws are living in district Muzaffarnagar.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents could not dispute the aforesaid position.
Paragraph 64 (III) of Divya Goswami (Supra) is quoted as under:-
"64. Since in this judgment I have already held Clauses 2(1)(A),(B) of the Government order dated 2nd December, 2019 to be contrary and in conflict with the statutory rules contained under the posting Rules, 2008 and clause 16 to be contradictory to the clause 15 of the Government order and also defeating the very objective sought to be achieved under the posting rules, 2008 in the light of the objectives set forth under the Right to Free Education for all Act, 2009 and Clause 15 of the Government Order dated 2.12.2019 be read down in the light of the observations made earlier in this judgment for female candidates as they may be specially circumstanced, I come to conclude with following observations/ directions to be necessarily kept in mind before finalizing the list of teachers seeking inter-district transfer:-
(I) ..............
(II) .............
(III) Once a teacher has successfully exercised the option for inter district transfer, no second opportunity shall be afforded to any teacher of any category except in case of female teacher who has already availed benefit of inter district transfer on the ground of parents dependency, prior to her marriage. However, in case if the marriage has taken place then she will have only one opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer either on the ground of parents dependency or spouse residence/ in-laws residence."
In such view of the matter, no factual dispute in this regard appears to be involved in the present writ petition as possibly factum of marriage of the petitioner cannot be disputed and the law as settled in Divya Goswami (Supra) clearly reflects that the petitioner is entitled for her candidature for inter-district transfer once again after marriage.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 24.12.2020 passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Shamli is quashed and the matter is remanded back to the respondent no. 3, the Secretary, U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Shiksha Nideshalaya at Prayagraj for taking decision afresh, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a self attested copy of this order which may be verified from the website of this Court.
This writ petition stands allowed. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 3.2.2021
p.s.
