Consideration of transfer of teachers in special circumstances cannot be refused on the ground that at present no policy instructions and mandate are in effect - Allahabad High Court

Case:- WRIT-A No. 17466 of 2022

Petitioner :- Kusum Yadav

Respondent:- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Man Bahadur Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh, Deo Dayal

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

Heard Sri M.B. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents, Sri Deo Dayal, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 & 4 and Sri B.P. Singh, learned counsel representing respondent No.5.

The petitioner was initially appointed and is working as Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Salempur, Block Sakaldiha, District Chandauli. Husband of the petitioner, namely, Ashish Prakash Yadav, is the only son to his parents who lives with his parents at District Azamgarh. Unfortunately, the husband of the petitioner was diagnosed with serious infection in his kidney and he underwent renal transplant surgery for plantation of kidney which was donated by his mother (mother-in-law of the petitioner). Now both the husband and mother-in-law of the petitioner are suffering from post surgery trauma and kidney related problems as both of them are now living with only one kidney and the petitioner is posted at District Chandauli with one minor daughter as such nobody is there to look after the petitioner's husband and mother-in-law except the old aged father-in-law of the petitioner who is also suffering from old aged diseases. The petitioner has preferred her transfer from Chandauli to Azamgarh for the reasons aforesaid as living with her husband will facilitate proper care and also allow her to discharge her duties properly as Assistant Teacher.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Rule 8(2)(d) of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers)(Posting) Rules, 2008 (in short 'the Rules, 2008') which permits such inter district transfers of women teachers in special circumstances at the place of residence of their husband or in-laws, which reads as under:

"8(2)(d) In normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers iLearned counsel representing the respondents submit that no policy has been framed by the Government as yet in this regard.

The contention is misconceived. The implementation of the provision in Rule-8(2)(d) is not dependent upon framing of any policy. This is not to say that the Government cannot frame a policy but to say that if the Government does not frame any policy, it does not mean that Rule-8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008 can't be given effect. The Rules have been made under the Basic Education Act, 1972. There is nothing in the Rules to suggest that any policy is required to be framed under Rule-8(2) (d) of the Rules, 2008 and only then such transfers can be made.

In view of the aforesaid, let respondent No.2, Director, Basic Education, U.P. at Lucknow, consider the request of the petitioner for transfer from Chandauli to Azamgarh, keeping in mind the facts of the case and the object sought to be achieved by Rule-8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008. The application shall not be rejected on the ground that there is no policy framed in this regard for the reasons already mentioned herein-above.

With these observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 4.11.22

(Referred by- Arun Kumar Gupta Advocate)