SUSHMA PANDEY Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will also govern the disposal of Writ Petition No.956/2011. The facts for the purposes of this order are taken from Writ Petition No.750/2011.

(2.) The only grievance of the petitioner is that on account of absorption of the petitioner, in terms of the policy dated 27/11/2009 her seniority has been tempered with and instead of giving seniority of the period of her initial appointment she has been given the seniority from the date of joining in Janpad Panchayat, Sidhi. It is contended that the petitioner was initially appointed as Siksha Karmi, Grade III vide order dated 06/07/1998 by Janpad Panchayat, Chitrangi District Sidhi. Thereafter, a policy was made by the State Government with respect to the transfer of lady teachers appointed under the Siksha Karmi Schemes from one District/Tehsil/Block to another in case of vacancies in certain circumstances. In this policy dated 19/03/2002 it was provided that in case lady Siksha Karmi is married and her husband is appointed in a separate local body, on the application of the lady concerned, she could be transferred to the place where her husband is posted. However, this policy nowhere prescribes that in case of such a choice transfer, the concerned employee will loss the seniority and will get the benefit of seniority from the date of joining in the transferred place. It is contended that thereafter a decision was taken by the State Government to absorb all such Siksha Karmies as Adhyapak. Accordingly the case of the petitioner was considered and she was absorbed on the post of Sahayak Adhyapak on 14/08/2008. Thereafter, a gradation seniority list was issued on 05/06/2010 in which the seniority of the petitioner was fixed at serial no.306 only on account of her joining in the Janpad Panchayat school at Sidhi and the past services rendered by her was not taken into account. Since this was done in violation of the right of seniority of the petitioner, a representation was made. Since the representation was not considered this petition is required to be filed. It is claimed that the petitioner be granted benefit of past services rendered by her as Siksha Karmi for the purposes of fixation of her seniority.

(3.) On service of the notice of the writ petition the respondents have filed their return. The respondent no.1 has contended that policy was made by the State Government and according to the said policy, on absorption the persons if were transferred from one local body to another local body they were granted the benefit of seniority from the date of joining on the transferred place. It is contended that since the petitioner was transferred from one Janpad Panchayat to another, rightly her seniority was fixed from the date of her joining on the transferred place. It is contended that no wrong has been committed by the respondents. Similar stand is taken by respondent no.2 and 3 who have also filed the return and have contended that they have taken action only because of the policy made by the state Government.