MAYABEN LALBHAI PATEL Vs. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the cancellation of her transfer order after she joined at the place of posting, hence this petition.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are, that the petitioner is serving as a Primary Teacher in Gandhinagar District ever since 3.1.1983. Thereafter she was performing her duties as such at the Primary School in which she was posted by the respondents, from time to time. It is the case of the petitioner that in 1992 she was transferred without her request to School No.12 in Sector No.12, Gandhinagar, within seven months of her joining at School No.13/1 in Sector No.13, Gandhinagar. She obeyed the transfer order to School No.12 in Sector No.12, Gandhinagar but, since she faced some inconvenience and her residence was located in Sector No.6, therefore, she requested for her transfer to any School in Sector No.6. Moreover, as per the averment of the petitioner, there was an excess of teachers in School No.12 at Sector No.12 and a deficit of teachers in School No.6/1 in Sector No.6, Gandhinagar, to which School she had made a request to be transferred. The request of the petitioner for transfer from Sector No.12 to Sector No.6 was granted and vide order dated 12.7.1997 she was so transferred. The Head Master of the School in Sector No.12 relieved the petitioner at the close of office hours on 26.8.1993 and the petitioner joined in School No.6/1 in Sector.No.6 on 27.8.1993. The petitioner was discharging her duties at this place when her transfer to School No.6/1 in Sector No.6, Gandhinagar was cancelled and she was asked to report back to the School at Sector 12, at once.

(3.) I have heard Shri K.B.Pujara, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Nandini Joshi, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, and have gone through the record. Shri K.B.Pujara submits that the petitioner had requested for her transfer to School No.6/1 in Sector No.6,Gandhinagar on the ground that it was inconvenient for her to work in the School at Sector 12, since the Primary Schools are located at far distances from one another and some of the Schools are in remote, interior villages, where the transportation facilities are not proper. It is, therefore, difficult for the petitioner, being a lady, to commute between long distances. The respondents had acceded to the request of the petitioner and had transferred her to School No.6/1 in Sector No.6, Gandhinagar, where she had already joined on 27.8.1993. The cancellation of the transfer of the petitioner to this School and the direction that she joins back at School No.12 was, therefore, highly arbitrary and discriminatory. Moreover, there was an excess of teachers in the School in Sector No.12 and a shortage of teachers in School No.6/1 in Sector No.6 and this factor must have weighed with the then Administrative Officer, while allowing the request of the petitioner and posting her at School No.6/1 in Sector No.6. The position being the same, there was no logical reason for cancelling the said transfer without hearing the petitioner. Shri K.B.Pujara, therefore, submits that in view of the above, the impugned cancellation of the petitioner's transfer be quashed and set aside.