Prem Chand Mahour vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7571 MP

                             1
           THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       WP-25239-2021
           Prem Chand Mahour Vs. State of MP and ors.

Gwalior, Dated : 18/11/2021

      Shri Jitendra Kumar Sharma, Counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri Abhishek Sharma, Counsel for the State.

      By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

the petitioner has challenged the order dated 31.08.2021 passed by the

respondent No. 4, by which the petitioner has been transferred from

Government Primary Girls School, Jaini, Tahsil and District Sheopur

to Government Primary School, Kyar Pura, Tahsil and District

Sheopur.

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that there is

already a shortage of teachers in Government Primary Girls School,

Jaini and against 130 students, only 4 teachers including the petitioner

are working. Furthermore, the petitioner had met with an accident on

28.08.2021, i.e., just three days prior to issuance of the impugned

order and has sustained injuries and is unable to move anywhere

without support of others. Furthermore, during Covid-19 Pandemic,

the petitioner was detected positive for Covid-19.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

So far as the disability of the petitioner is concerned, it is clear

from the petition that the affidavit was sworn by the petitioner before

Oath Commissioner at Gwalior. Furthermore, the petitioner had met

with an accident on 28.08.2021 and this affidavit was sworn on

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-25239-2021 Prem Chand Mahour Vs. State of MP and ors.

12.11.2021. Thus, it is clear that now the petitioner must have

recovered from the injuries.

In the entire writ petition, the petitioner has not disclosed the

date from, which he is posted in Government Primary Girls School,

Jaini, therefore, it is clear that the petitioner must have completed his

normal tenure of three years.

So far as the shortage of teachers in Government Primary Girls

School, Jaini is concerned, it is for the State to maintain the pupil-

teacher ratio. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory

Education Act, 2009 does not say that in case, if the pupil-teacher ratio

is likely to be disturbed, then no one can be transferred. If somebody

has been transferred, then it is the duty of the State to ensure that the

pupil-teacher ratio as required under the Act, 2009 is maintained.

At this stage, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner has made a representation and, therefore, the

respondents be directed to decide the same.

In view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this

Court in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of MP and

others reported in ILR (2015) MP 2556, it is directed that after

submitting his joining at his transferred place, if the petitioner submits

his supplementary representation along with the medical documents to

show as to whether he is still incapacitated or not and whether he has

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-25239-2021 Prem Chand Mahour Vs. State of MP and ors.

been discharged from the hospital, then the said representation shall

be decided as early as possible preferably within a period of one

month from the date of making supplementary representation along

with the certified copy of this order.

Needless to mention that the direction to decide the

representation should not be construed as a direction to allow the

representation and the representation shall be decided strictly in

accordance with law.

With aforesaid observations, the petition is finally disposed of.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Abhi ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI 2021.11.22 18:08:24 +05'30'