Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23069 of 2018 Petitioner :- Monika Tyagi Respondent :- District Basic Education Officer, Shamli, And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Raj Singh,Adarsh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the prayer clause, during the course of the day.
2. Heard Sri Indra Raj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2 and; Sri Virendra Chaubey, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.
3. The petitioner claims to be a regularly appointed Assistant Teacher teaching Science and Maths subject at Junior Basic School, Dalaval, Block-Parsendi, District- Sitapur. It is further submitted that there is no other teacher for the subject Science and Maths at the aforesaid institution. Details of such teachers and students who are receiving education at the aforesaid institution is given in paragraph 9 and 10 of the writ petition.
4. On the strength of assertion so made, it has been submitted that the petitioner could never have been declared surplus teacher as upon her transfer there remains no other teacher who may teach subject Science and Maths. In such circumstances, it has been submitted that the order to declare the petitioner as surplus and to adjust her in another institution is patently erroneous and in any case no opportunity was given to her to disclose her choice of institution before the adjustment was made.
5. In this regard, reference has been made to the transfer policy wherein hardship of the lady teacher has in any case been required to be considered.
6. Prima facie case is being made out by the petitioner. At the same time, it appears, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petitioner pending any further or calling for counter affidavit at this stage, since the declaration of surplus does not appear to be in dispute.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following observation:
(i) the petitioner may file a fresh representation along with a certified copy of this order before the respondent no.1 - District Basic Education Officer, Shamli within a period of two weeks from today;
(ii) in the event the said respondent is of prima facie view that the representation/application deserves to be rejected, he may issue a prior show cause notice to the petitioner specifying the points on which the petitioner's representation is proposed to be rejected within two weeks therefrom;
(iii) the petitioner shall be at liberty to file her final reply to such notice, if issued, within two weeks and no more from the date of receipt of that notice;
(iv) the respondent no.1 may proceed to hear and decide the same strictly in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of filing of last reply by the petitioner, if any.
8. For a period of three months from today or till decision of the representation, whichever is earlier, the operation and effect of the order dated 24.08.2018 passed by the respondent no.1- District Basic Education Officer, Shamli shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 27.10.2018 Abhilash