PRATIBHA KUSHRAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 10.07.2014 as also the order dated 25.08.2014 by which the respondent No. 5 is posted in place of the petitioner and by subsequent order the representation made by the petitioner against that order is rejected on the ground that the petitioner was substantially appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher, was promoted on the post of Superintendent of Hostel and was made to work as Hostel Superintendent in Scheduled Caste Pre -Metric Girls Hostel, Nainpur. Since the petitioner was substantively holding the post, which was vacated by one Smt. Sangeeta Kawde, without making any posting order in respect of the petitioner, the respondent No. 5 could not have been posted on the said post. A representation was made by the petitioner but the same was not being considered, therefore, she was required to approach this Court by way of filing W.P. No. 10558/2014, which writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 22.07.2014 with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously. The interim protection was granted to the petitioner directing that status quo with respect to the posting shall be maintained till the representation is decided. By the subsequent impugned order dated 25.08.2014 since the representation made by the petitioner has been rejected, she is now left with no option but to file this writ petition.

(2.) WHILE entertaining the writ petition, this Court granted an interim protection on 19.09.2014 directing that status quo with respect to the posting of the petitioner be maintained. Since this order was passed, the petitioner was allowed to continue on the post and even when after service of notice of this writ petition, the respondent No. 5 filed her reply and an application for vacating stay, the I.A. filed by the respondent No. 5 was rejected and opportunity was granted to the State to file a return and if necessary, to move appropriate application for vacating stay. The respondents No. 1 to 4 and 6 have filed their return categorically contending that the petitioner has not come with clean hands before this Court inasmuch as she has made a wrong statement in her writ petition regarding her appointment as Hostel Superintendent. It is contended by the respondents that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher and was posted in Govt. Naveen Middle School, Nainpur. The charge of the post of Hostel Superintendent was given in addition to the petitioner and there is no channel of promotion provided from the post of Assistant Teacher to the post of Hostel Superintendent. Therefore, the petitioner is not a regular incumbent holding the post of Hostel Superintendent. It is contended that the respondent No. 5 though was appointed on contract basis but her appointment is specifically against the post of Superintendent of the Tribal Hostel and, therefore, the petitioner cannot say that the respondent No. 5 is not eligible to be posted in place of the petitioner. It is contended that these facts the petitioner was knowing fully well but has deliberately concealed to mislead this Court for obtaining an interim stay. Even if no posting order is issued in respect of the petitioner, she is to continue on her substantive post of Assistant Teacher in the school where she has been posted on regular basis. There would not be any problem in drawing the salary of the petitioner as she is not getting the salary from the post of Hostel Superintendent, which post is not substantially held by the petitioner. In view of this, it is contended that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. An application for vacation of the interim order is also made on these grounds by the aforesaid respondents.

(3.) THOUGH rejoinders have been filed by the petitioner firstly meeting out the allegations made by the respondent No. 5 in her return and secondly meeting out the allegations made by the respondents No. 1 to 4 and 6 in their return but except placing on record an order of appointment of the respondent No. 5 and order passed by this Court in one of the writ petition, nothing more is stated. In the additional rejoinder a circular of the State Government has been placed on record to show that in the girls hostels only the aged Scheduled Caste/Tribal Teacher is required to be posted. Nothing much is said in the rejoinders.