In the case of Kul Bhushan Mishra v State of UP Two assistant teachers filed a writ petition challenging Clauses 1 and 15 of the Government Order as well as the ensuing Board of Basic Education Secretary circular, which restricted the State’s ability to entertain transfer applications under normal circumstances unless the applicant had served the required amount of time in the cadre. The inter-district transfer was something the petitioners want to pursue. They have pleaded for the State to approve their transfer in line with Rule 21 of the Rules of 1981 and to consider their application for an inter-district transfer without requiring five years of service in the district in question. The circular is also contested on the grounds that the Board welcomed applications for transfers of Assistant Teachers between districts but barred transfers made with mutual consent at the same time.
Analysis of Court Decision
The U.P. Basic Education Service Rules, 1981 as well as any other Act or provision are not violated by the minimum length of service required before requesting a transfer, according to the Allahabad High Court’s division bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava The State’s policy was therefore declared to be legitimate and without flaw by the Court.
The Court observed that the petitioners’ main complaints are two-fold: First of all, there is no justification for excluding instructors who request transfers by mutual consent when soliciting applications for the transfer of Assistant instructors. Second, it is argued that it is arbitrary and discriminatory to require a male teacher to work for five years before seeking a transfer. Since the U.P. Basic Education Teachers Posting Rules, 2008 do not address teacher transfers and Rule 21 of the Rules, 1981 does not contain a similar limitation, the five-year service requirement is both arbitrary and unjustified.
According to the Court, Assistant Teachers are often not considered for cadre transfers. According to Rule 21, the transfer from one cadre to another is conditional and needs the Board’s permission. As a result, the Court determined that transfer cannot be asserted as a matter of right in these institutions. Thus, the Board would be justified in establishing a standard procedure for considering transfer applications.