Narayan Mahadu Vishwabrahma vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 152 Bom

                                         1           9-WP-7743.odt


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD
          WRIT PETITION NO.7743 OF 2016  
                      
Narayan s/o. Mahadu Vishwabrahma,
Age : 51 years, Occ. Service as
Assistant Teacher, 
r/o. Vazra (Bk.),
Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded            ..Petitioner
               Vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra,
   Through its Secretary,
   Rural Development and Water
   Conservation Department,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
   Zilla Parishad, Nanded
3. The Education Officer (Primary),
   Zilla Parishad, Nanded           ..Respondents 
                          --
Mr.V.S.Panpatte, Advocate for petitioner
Mr.A.R.Kale, AGP for respondent no.1 
Mr.S.B.Pulkundwar,   Advocate   for   respondent   nos.2 
and 3
                          --
                                 CORAM :  T.V. NALAWADE AND
                                          SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. 

DATE : FEBRUARY 28, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per T.V.Nalawade, J.) :

Rule, made returnable forthwith. With

the consent of the learned Counsels for the

parties, heard finally.

2 9-WP-7743.odt

2. This petition is filed for direction. The

petitioner is working as Assistant Teacher in

Zilla Parishad School, Wazra (Bk.), Tq.Kinwat,

Dist. Nanded, which is a tribal area. It is the

grievance of the petitioner that though, as per

the scheme prepared under the Government

Resolution dated 15.05.2014 issued by the Rural

Development Department, Government of Maharashtra,

Mantralaya, Mumbai, he is entitled to get posting

outside the tribal area, he is retained there. It

is the case of the petitioner that he is a heart

patient and has undergone a surgery of heart. He

has continuously worked for three years in the

tribal area. The learned Counsel for the

petitioner submits that considering the above

grounds, the petitioner should be transferred on

request basis from his present posting to Zilla

Parishad Primary School, Wangi, Tq. Nanded.

3. The learned Counsel for the Zilla

Parishad disputed the contention that the

3 9-WP-7743.odt

petitioner has worked continuously for three years

at present station. The record shows that he was

posted at the present place on 08.07.2013 and so

admittedly, he had not completed three years of

continuous service by 31.05.2016.

4. Though this circumstance is there, the

scheme shows that not only the employees of the

special category mentioned in Part-I Clause 4 of

the afore-mentioned Government Resolution who are

due for transfer, but the employees who are not

due for transfer but fall under special category,

can also be considered for request transfer. Thus,

there was some misconception that unless an

employee is due for transfer, he cannot be

transferred though he falls under the special

category.

5. It is not the specific case of the

respondent - Zilla Parishad that there are no

vacant posts available out side the tribal area.

The petitioner had worked on the said post in the

4 9-WP-7743.odt

tribal area also in the year 2001. All these

circumstances need to be considered. This Court

yesterday decided many petitions and noticed that

many employees are not ready to go to tribal area.

When that is the approach of many employees and

present petitioner had joined present posting,

this circumstance ought to have been considered by

the Zilla Parishad.

6. In view of these circumstances and as

admittedly, there are many vacant posts available

outside the tribal area (outside Kinwat and Mahur

Tahsils), it is possible for the respondent -

Zilla Parishad to give posting to the petitioner

in other Tahsil. The scheme under the afore-said

Government Resolution also provide for giving

Tahsil as per the choice of the employee. It

appears that when the representation was made by

the present petitioner, the Block Education

Officer had given direction to verify and

ascertain, whether there is such irregularity.

5 9-WP-7743.odt

7. In view of these circumstances, this

Court holds that the present petition needs to be

allowed.

8. In the result, the Writ Petition is

allowed. The respondent - Zilla Parishad is

hereby directed to consider the claim of the

petitioner for transfer in accordance with the

Government Resolution dated 15.05.2014. The

decision be taken within a period of one month

from today.

9. Rule made absolute in the above terms.

The Writ Petition stands allowed accordingly.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [T.V. NALAWADE, J.]

kbp