HARMOHINI WIFE OF SHRI PARKASH SINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF H P THROUGH SECRETARY EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF H P SHIMLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged her transfer from Government Senior Secondary School, Jassai to Government Middle School, Kutharna, dated 02.05.2012. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that his client has to retire within a period of one year and as per the transfer policy framed by the State Government, an incumbent, who has to retire within a period of two years, his/her option of choice of station is required to be obtained.

(2.) WE have ordered the State to produce the record. The record has been produced. We have gone through the record carefully. A memorandum was issued to the Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. petitioner under Rule-14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on 28th September, 2011. The Article-1 reads thus:

(3.) PETITIONER is a teacher. A teacher cannot misbehave with the superiors, students and their guardians. The inquiry has been made strictly in conformity with principles of natural justice. Petitioner has also been heard and her statement was recorded. The guidelines framed by the respondent-State are not statutory. Though, in normal circumstances, these are required to be followed. However, in the present case, the circumstances were extraordinary, requiring immediate transfer of the petitioner from Government Senior Secondary School, Jassai to Government Middle School, Kutharna. The administrative reason to transfer the petitioner was to restore normalacy in the School. The petitioner cannot be permitted to vitiate the academic atmosphere. Ordinarily, a teacher should not be transferred if has less than two years to superannuate, but in exceptional circumstances, it would be open to the State Government to transfer the teacher in larger public interest and administrative exigency, even if he/she has to retire within a period of two years. The scope of judicial review in transfer matters is limited. The power to transfer is coupled with duty to ensure judiciousness and fairness. The transfer of the petitioner is purely on administrative ground and this Court will not substitute its own wisdom.