TARAGAURI KALYANJI KHIMANI Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT, JAMNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was posted in a school different from the one where she was teaching when she came back after finishing her B.Ed. Course, which course she joined to better her prospects. According to her, she should not have been transferred to some other place - a plea which did not appeal to the authorities. The learned Single Judge whose judgment is under appeal, did not find the plea as calling for interference by the Court. Therefore, he dismissed the petition summarily. We also agree with the learned Judge, that on the question whether the petitioner should be posted to the same place or not, it is not for this Court to speak. The petitioner has tried all available means to put off joining the school where she was working as she was bound to do by the order of authorities by resorting to every conceivable course.

(2.) IT is surprising that the Subordinate Civil Courts take matters of transfers lightly and quite often interfere making a casual approach in passing orders staying such transfers. Governmental administration calls for transfers from time to time and it is not for the Court to sit in judgment over every transfer. The governmental machinery must be allowed play at the joints. It is not for this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, much less for the subordinate Courts in civil suits to weigh in golden scales the propriety or otherwise of a transfer as that must necessarily be left to the authority passing the order of transfer. The circumstances where a Court functioning under Article 226 of the Constitution would be justified in interfering with an order of transfer have been noticed by Courts. Gross violation of rules or self -declared. policy relating to transfer indicating prima facie that there is a clear case of discrimination or circumstances which eloquently speak of mala fides would justify such interference. Any subordinate civil court merely because a suit is filed alleging that there is mala fides in the transfer would not be justified in passing an interim order staying the transfer even if there is a plea of mala fides remembering that mala fides succeed very rarely and it is not easy to make out successfully the case of mala fides. Courts should well be aware that it is not to take any and every statement of mala fides as deserving of notice for grant of interim relief. The practice of staying such transfers by subordinate civil courts, we notice, from figures supplied to us, has become so rampant that it is time that we consider whether this does not amount to an abuse. The best illustration of the use of the civil court for purposes of putting off implementation of transfer is furnished by the case before us and we are well aware that there may be many other similar cases. The subordinate Courts will do well to remember that in this process they are not promoting justice. Having tried the hierarchy of Civil Courts including this Court in revision, the petitioner moved this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India after withdrawing the revision petition filed in this Court. In this background, we do not think that the dismissal of the Special Civil Application by the learned Single Judge calls for any interference by us in appeal.

(3.) THE petitioner's Counsel submits that the petitioner has now been transferred to a place where normally a woman should not be posted. He says that it is far away from any accessible place. Of course, if the facts happen to be as they are being represented to us, it is for the petitioner to move the authorities concerned to transfer her to some other place. We see no reason why a sympathetic view should not be taken in regard to the petitioner's case for transfer to some other place. The only objection of the department would be to keep her in the place where she was working prior to going for the B.Ed. Course. One can understand the resistance when the petitioner insists that she should be back in that place; but, considering the fact that she is a woman, it is only fair that the authorities post her to a place easily accessible by road, a place where a woman teacher can easily find accommodation. In that behalf if a representation is made by the petitioner to the authorities concerned, that will be looked into and disposed of expeditiously. This is not to say that the petitioner need not obey the order and join at the place to which she now stands transferred. If she makes the representation, her compliance with the order in force will go a long way in considering her representation sympathetically and we expect the authorities to look into the matter in the spirit in which we make this direction. It will be appropriate to give her relief by posting her to a place where she would not find difficulty in obtaining residential quarters and which is more easily accessible.