Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
View the actual judgment from court
User Queries
Chattisgarh High Court
6 Smt Hemin Jalkshatriya vs 4 Chief Executive Officer on 20 March, 2009




               Writ Petition No 2950 of 2006

                1  Smt  Maheshwari Sahu

                 2  Smt Hemlata Darshan

                 3  Smt  Chandrakala Markandey

                 4  Smt  Premlata  Chandrakar

                 5  Smt Neetu Sahu

                 6  Smt Hemin Jalkshatriya


                1  State  of  Chhattisgarh

                 2  The  Collector District Mahasamund (CG)

                 3  Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat

                 4  Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat

! Shri R.K. Kesarwani, Advocate for the petitioners ^ Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the State Honble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J Dated: 20/03/2009 : Judgment (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) ORAL ORDER Passed on 20th day of March, 2009 With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing, finally.

1. The petitioners by this petition impugn the transfer policy of Shiksha Karmis contained in circular dated 27.10.2005 (Annexure P/3), issued by the Principal Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Panchayat & Social Welfare Department, Raipur, whereby superceding earlier guidelines, fresh guidelines have been issued for transfers of Shiksha Karmis and it has been decided that the Shiksha Karmis who are transferred from one Janpad Panchayat to another Janpad Panchayat on their own request, shall be junior in their category at the transferred Janpad Panchayat.

2. The facts, in nutshell are that, the petitioners were appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade III in the year 1998 in Janpad Panchayat Pithora and Bagbahara, District Mahasamund. The services of the petitioners were regularized in the year 2002. The petitioners were transferred from Janpad Panchayat Pithora/Bagbahara to Janpad Panchayat Mahasamund, on their own request, in accordance with existing transfer policies dated 21.04.2003, 14.05.2003, 13.02.2004, 09.03.2004 and 19.10.2004.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the respondents have not taken into consideration the names of the petitioners for promotion from the post of Shiksha Karim Grade III to Shiksha Karmi Grade II and their juniors have been promoted to Shiksha Karmi Grade II without impleading them as party respondents. He further submits that when the petitioners were transferred from Janpad Panchayat Pithora/Bagbahara to Janpad Panchayat Mahasamund, there was no specific direction regarding their seniority in the transferred Janpad Panchayat and further, circular dated 27.10.2005 (Annexure P/3) was not in existence at that point of time also, therefore the petitioners ought to have been promoted to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II.

4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties; perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. The issue involved in the present petition is as to whether the petitioners are entitled to seniority from the date they have joined one Janpad Panchayat or from the date they have joined new Janpad Panchayat, on their own request. Since the State Government, by circular dated 27.10.2005 (Annexure P/3), issued fresh guidelines superceding all its earlier guidelines that the Shiksha Karmis who are transferred from one Janpad Panchayat to another Janpad Panchayat on their own request, shall be junior in their category at the transferred Janpad Panchayat

5. This very issue came into consideration before this court in the matter of Smt. Asha Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others {W.P. No. 3275/06} and another connected matter. This court, after having considered the matters from all angles, observed as under :

"13. For the aforesaid reasons, the contention of the petitioners that the transfer policy of Annexure-P/1 does not have retrospective application and the petitioners' service conditions are governed by the circular of Annexure - P/7 issued in the year 2003 wherein no specific provision is there that on transfer of Shiksha Karmi to another Janpad Panchayat, on his own request, his seniority would be reckoned from the date he joins at the transferred place is without any substance. This circular of Annexure P/1 dated 27.10.2005 only contains guidelines as to under what circumstances Shiksha Karmis can be transferred and reiterate provisions of Rule 27 of Rules, 1999 that such transferred Shiksha Karmis shall be treated as junior most in the category where they joined after transfer.
14. According to the Rule 1997, Shiksha Karmi Grade III is entitled for promotion only if the candidate is graduate and possesses seven years teaching experience. Since the petitioners' seniority is to be reckoned from the year 2003, their cases for promotion can be considered only after completion of seven years of mandatory teaching experience."

6. The Supreme Court, subsequently, in the matter of Union of India and Others Vs. Deo Narain and Others1 observed as under :

"32. What was held in Ponnappan by this court was that if an employee is transferred from one department to another department on compassionate ground, he would be placed at the bottom of the seniority in the transferee department. Hence, at the time of his transfer in the transferee department, all employees in the same cadre who were very much serving at that time would be shown above such transferee employee and in such combined seniority list, the transferred employee would be shown as junior most. The only thing which this court said and with respect, rightly, is that such an employee who had already worked in a particular cadre and gained experience, will not lose past service and experience for the purpose of considering eligibility when his case comes up for consideration for further promotion."

7. Having applied well-settled principles of law to the facts of the case where the petitioners were transferred from Janpad Panchayat Pithora and Bagbahara to Janpad Panchayat Mahasamund on their own request, the petitioners are not entitled to seniority on the basis of their services in Janpad Panchayat Pithora and Bagbahara, as the case may be.

8. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition having no merits, is dismissed. No order asto costs.