The Allahabad High Court has recently directed the Basic Education Council to consider the issue of appointment of husband and wife in the same district in the context of inter-district transfer.
A single-judge bench of Justice Saral Srivastava passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Radha Kant Tripathi.
In this petition, the petitioner is an assistant teacher and his online application for transfer from Sitapur to Prayagraj has been rejected. The Court noted that the petitioner has sought transfer on the ground that his wife is also an Assistant Teacher and is posted at Prayagraj.
Request for transfer apparently has not been entertained on the ground that petitioner has not completed a five-year term as Assistant Teacher. Order impugned is assailed on the ground that the Court in the judgment of the Writ Petition No.4950 of 2018 has already examined the issue and it has been held that transfer even before five years would be permissible in extraordinary circumstances.
The question as to whether such extraordinary circumstances exist or not, however, would be a question to be determined by the Parishad, the Court said.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Rule 8(2)(d) of the 2008 Rules, five years’ service in a district is mandatory for inter-district transfer. There are some exceptions to this rule as well. Giving appointments to husband and wife in the same district comes under this exception.
Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that posting of husband and wife at one station would also be an exceptional circumstance.
The Court further said that, in perusal of the order impugned it does not appear that there is a conscious determination by the Parishad on the application filed by petitioner for inter-district transfer. The application apparently has not been entertained only on the ground that a period of five year has not lapsed.
The Court held that the transfer in exceptional circumstances would be permissible.
The Court ordered that, it would be appropriate to permit the petitioner to represent his grievance before respondents, alongwith copy of this order, within four weeks from today. Such claim of petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law within a further period of four months, thereafter. The impugned rejection of online application would not stand in the way of such consideration of petitioner’s claim.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petition.
Crime Today News | Judiciary