Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Golak Chandra Biswas vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 17 September, 2021
Ct. 05
Item No.14
17.09.2021
(suvendu)
WPA 14486 OF 2021
(VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE)
Golak Chandra Biswas
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Arijit Bakshi
.............for the petitioner
Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay
Mr. Amritolal Chatterjee
..........for the State
Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya
Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharya
..........for the DPSC North 24 Parganas
The writ petitioner is a Primary Teacher, who
is aggrieved by issuance of order of transfer dated
2nd September, 2021 whereby the writ petitioner
has been asked to join the post of Assistant
Teacher in South Barunhat Fp School,
Primary/Jr. Basic School Hasnabad South Circle,
within a period of fifteen working days from the
date of issuance of the said transfer order.
Mr. Arijit Bakshi, learned advocate appears
on behalf of the writ petitioner and submits that
the transfer order dated 2nd September, 2021 is
bad in law and this should have been issued
considering the relevant provisions of the Right to
Education Act, which is a Central Act, in stead of
2
following the provisions of the West Bengal
Primary Education (Transfer of Teachers including
Head Teacher) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to
as "said Rules of 2002), which is being a State
legislation, is at lower echelon of legislation.
Considering the submissions made on behalf
of the writ petitioner, this Court has enquired into
the fact as to whether the relevant provisions
relating to transfer, as contained in the said Rules
of 2002, has been assailed in this writ petition. In
answer to such query, Mr Bakshi has submitted
that no such prayer has made in this writ petition.
The second ground of challenge against the
said transfer order dated 2nd September, 2021 is
that such transfer order has been issued without
assigning any cogent reason in support of such
transfer. An additional point has also been taken
on behalf of the writ petitioner that the impugned
order of transfer is mala fide but nothing has been
demonstrated to this Court as to why such
transfer order should be termed as mala fide.
Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya, learned
Additional Government Pleader and Mr. Supriyo
Chattopadhyay, learned Senior Government
Advocate appear on behalf of the District Primary
School Council, North 24 -Parganas, and the State
respondents, respectively, and they have opposed
the writ petition on the ground that in terms of
Rule 4(a) of the said Rules of 2002, such transfer
order dated 2nd September, 2021 has been issued
on administrative ground. Therefore, there is no
illegality in issuance of such transfer order and in
addition thereto, it has been submitted that the
said impugned transfer order is not punitive one.
It has also been submitted on behalf of the State
respondents that the release order has already
been issued on 15th September, 2021 by the
concerned Sub-Inspector of Schools addressed to
the Secretary, North 24 Parganas District Primary
School Council, pursuant to the said transfer
order dated 2nd September, 2021.
This Court has considered the rival
contentions of the parties to this writ petition and
also examined the relevant provisions relating to
transfer of a primary teacher that is Rule 4(a) of
the said Rules of 2002. On consideration of the
said Rule 4(a), it is clear that the District Primary
School Council is empowered to transfer a primary
teacher on administrative ground. In
consideration of the point taken on behalf of the
writ petitioner relating to failure on the part of the
respondent authorities to assign reason in support
of such transfer, it is now well established that for
transferring an employee in accordance with the
relevant Rules relating to transfer the authority is
not required to assign reasons unless and until
the transfer order is a punitive one. Upon
considering the facts of this case, this Court does
not find that the said order of transfer dated 2nd
September, 2021 is mala fide.
Learned advocate representing the writ
petitioner has relied upon a judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1979 Supreme
Court 1628 (Ramana Dayaram Shetty Vs. The
International Airport Authority of India and
Others) and paragraph 10 of the said judgment in
support of the contention of the writ petitioner
that the order of transfer is arbitrary in nature.
On careful perusal of the said judgment, this
Court finds that the same is not relevant in the
present facts situation since in this writ petition
the writ petitioner has been transferred vide
transfer order dated 2nd September, 2021 in terms
of the relevant provisions of the said Rules of
2002.
In view of the above discussions, the writ
petition stands dismissed without any order as to
costs.
However, it is made clear that since the writ
petitioner has challenged the order of transfer by
filing this writ petition on 13 th September, 2021,
the time fixed by the Secretary, North 24 Parganas
District Primary School Council, for joining the
transferred post by the writ petitioner is extended
for a further period of seven days from this day.
Since release order has already been issued by the
concerned Sub-Inspector of Schools on 15th
September, 2021, if petitioner joins the transferred
post, the concerned respondent authorities are
directed to ensure that he ought not to face any
impediment while joining.
All parties to act on the server copy of this
order downloaded from the official website of this
Hon'ble Court.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be given to the parties on usual
undertakings.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)
