Uttarakhand High Court
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors. ... ... vs Smt. Rekha Joshi on 3 June, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
2025:UHC:4427-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (SB) No. 125 of 2016
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors. ... Petitioners
Versus
Smt. Rekha Joshi ... Respondent
Mr. Syed Nadim, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate, for the respondent.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Hon'ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
(Per: Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan has filed this
writ petition challenging the judgment rendered by
Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application
No. 331/00042 of 2014. By the said judgment, the
Original Application, filed by the respondent
challenging rejection of her representation, was
allowed and Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan was
directed to permit the respondent to join her
promotional post in Kendriya Vidyalaya at Ranikhet
within eight weeks. It was, however, provided that if
respondent fails to join within the stipulated time, her
promotion would be deemed as cancelled.
2. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan has
challenged the aforesaid judgment mainly on the
ground that respondent was earlier serving as TGT in
Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, HBK, Dehradun for more
than three years and thereafter she was transferred
on promotion as PGT to Kendriya Vidyalaya, Ranikhet,
2025:UHC:4427-DB
District Almora; in the order dated 29.7.2013,
whereby promotion was offered to respondent, it was
clearly stipulated that if she fails to get herself relieved
from Kendriya Vidyalaya at Dehradun by 17.8.2013 for
joining to the transferred school, then the offer of
promotion made to her shall stand withdrawn.
3. Mr. Syed Nadim, learned Counsel appearing
for the petitioners, submits that despite the clear
stipulation in the order of promotion, respondent failed
to get herself relieved from Dehradun nor did she join
at the transferred school i.e. Kendriya Vidyalaya,
Ranikhet, therefore, as per the stipulation made in the
order dated 29.7.2013, the offer of promotion to the
respondent was withdrawn. He further submits that
respondent made a representation and pursuant to
direction issued by Central Administrative Tribunal, the
competent authority examined the issues raised by the
respondent in her representation and rejected the
same; respondent thereafter again approached Central
Administrative Tribunal by filing OA No. 331/00042 of
2014, challenging the order of rejection passed by the
competent authority and this time the Original
Application filed by respondent was allowed by the
Tribunal and the competent authority in Kendriya
Vidyalaya Sangathan was directed to permit the
respondent to join duties on the promotional post in
Kendriya Vidyalaya, Ranikhet within eight weeks.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner thus submits that
interference made by Tribunal in the matter was
unwarranted, as, if teaching and non-teaching staff of
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan are permitted to flout
orders of transfer on promotion and thereafter they
2025:UHC:4427-DB
are given protection by Tribunal, it will send a wrong
message and will lead to indiscipline and chaos in the
organization.
4. Per contra, Mr. M.C. Pant, learned Counsel
appearing for the respondent, submits that husband of
the respondent was also serving as Teacher in
Kendriya Vidyalaya at Dehradun, therefore respondent
had requested for retaining her at Dehradun under the
spouse policy, however her representation did not find
favour with the competent authority and she was
asked to go to Ranikhet. He further submits that after
the judgment rendered by the Tribunal, when the
respondent went to Kendriya Vidyalaya, Ranikhet for
joining, she was not permitted to do so and therefore
she came back to Dehradun. Thus respondent cannot
be blamed for not joining her promotional post at
Ranikhet.
5. Having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case, we are of the considered
opinion that as there was clear stipulation in the order,
whereby promotion was offered to respondent, that
she has to get herself relieved and submit joining at
the transferred place upto a specific date, but she
made no effort either to get herself relieved or for
joining at the transferred place, therefore, the
employer was justified in withdrawing the offer of
promotion made to respondent. Thus the interference
made by learned Tribunal in the matter is
unwarranted. We, therefore, allow the writ petition,
set aside the impugned judgment, however we permit
the respondent to make representation for
2025:UHC:4427-DB
accommodating her on the post of PGT in any school
within Dehradun region. If respondent makes such
representation within three weeks from today,
competent authority shall look into the matter and
take decision, as per law, within six weeks thereafter.
Decision on respondent's representation shall be taken
independently, uninfluenced by any observation made
by us.
(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
3.6.2025
Pr
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
PRABODH KUMAR
2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503,
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3
C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR
Date: 2025.06.09 10:31:08 +05'30'
