JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral). With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, present petition is taken up for final disposal at preliminary stage, in view of the fact that only question of law is involved in the matter and facts are not in dispute. 2. Undisputedly, petitioners were posted as Assistant Teachers in Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur, Dehradun. In the year 2000, Municipality of Dehradun was upgraded to Municipal Corporation and village Kargi Grant was included within the territory of Municipal Corporation, Dehradun. Undisputedly, prior to inclusion of village Kargi Grant, Raipur in Municipal Corporation, Dehradun, it was considered as rural local area being village. Therefore, Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur was also being considered as rural local area school. However, after inclusion of village Kargi Grant within the territory of Municipal Corporation, Dehradun, Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur also came in the category of urban local area school. 3. As per Section 2 (k) and (r) of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules 1981 (for short “Rules 1981”), “rural local area” means the area over which a Zila Parishad exercises its jurisdiction and “urban local area” means the area over which a Nagar Mahapalika, Municipal Board, Town Area Committee or Notified Area Committee exercises its jurisdiction. 4. As per Rule 21 of 1981 Rules, there shall be no transfer of any teacher from the rural local area to an urban local area or vice versa. 5. As per sub-Rule (2) of Rule 22 of 1981 Rules, the seniority of a teacher, who has been transferred from one local area to another in accordance with the provisions of Rule 21 shall be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of teachers of the corresponding class or category pertaining to the local area. 6. After inclusion of village Kargi Grant within the territory of Municipal Corporation, Dehradun, options were called from the petitioners, as to whether they were inclined to join the cadre of urban local area or they wanted to continue in the cadre of rural local area and if they wish to continue in rural local area, they may be transferred to a school, outside the territory of Municipal Corporation, Dehradun. 7. 7. Both the petitioners, considering well that the moment they would opt for urban local area, they would be placed at the bottom in the seniority of urban local area, opted for urban local area, consequently, they were allowed to continue in Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur. 8. Vide order dated 15.09.2013, both the petitioners were transferred to schools fall within the category of rural local area. Petitioner no. 1 was transferred from Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur to Government Junior High School, Chumra, Chakrata and petitioner no. 2 was transferred from Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur to Government Junior High School, Kulha, Chakrata. 9. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners preferred writ petition no. 1368 (SS) of 2013 before this Court. When petition was taken up for hearing, Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Chief Standing Counsel appearing for State of Uttarakhand, made statement before the Coordinate Bench of this Court that he had been instructed to state that Rules 1981 are still applicable. Having recorded the statement of Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, the Coordinate Bench, vide order dated 26.09.2013, directed the petitioners to make representation, as required under Rule 26 of the Uttarakhand Teacher (School Education) First Appointment, Promotion and Posting on Transfer Rules, 2013 and further directed the respondent authorities to decide the statutory appeal, in accordance with law. 10. In compliance of order dated 26.09.2013, appeal, so filed by the petitioners, was dismissed by the authority concerned vide order dated 20.11.2013 on the ground that salaries of petitioners are still being paid from the Treasury made for rural local area. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners have preferred present writ petition. 11. I have heard Mr. Ravi Babulkar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State and have carefully perused the record. 12. Learned Brief Holder for the State does not dispute the correctness of statement made by Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, CSC before the Coordinate Bench, in earlier round of litigation that Rules 1981 are still applicable and have yet not been repealed. 13. Learned Brief Holder for the State does not dispute the fact that both the petitioners, after inclusion of village Kargi Grant within the territory of Municipal Corporation, Dehradun opted for absorption in urban local area, in view of the fact that Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur had fallen in urban local area. 13. Learned Brief Holder for the State does not dispute the fact that both the petitioners, after inclusion of village Kargi Grant within the territory of Municipal Corporation, Dehradun opted for absorption in urban local area, in view of the fact that Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur had fallen in urban local area. It is also not in dispute that petitioners, in view of their options, were placed at the bottom of seniority in urban local area cadre. Rule 21 of 1981 Rules reads as under: 21. Procedure for transfer - There shall be no transfer of any teacher from the rural local area to an urban local area or vice versa or from one urban local area to another of the same district or from local area of one district to that of another district except on the request of or with the consent of the teacher himself and in either case approval of the Board shall be necessary. 14. Having perused the record, I have no hesitation to hold that no teacher shall be transferred from urban local area to rural local area or vice versa without his consent and approval of the Board (competent authority). 15. Undisputedly, petitioners were absorbed in urban local area cadre in accordance with their options and thereafter, both the petitioners never consented for transfer from urban local area to rural local area. Therefore, impugned transfer order as well as impugned order rejecting the statutory appeal, on the face of it, are in violation of Rule 21 of Rules 1981, therefore, both the impugned orders do not sustain in the eyes of law. 16. In view of the above, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 15.09.2013 qua the petitioners and impugned order dated 20.11.2013 rejecting the statutory appeal of the petitioners, are hereby quashed. Petitioners shall be allowed to discharge their duties in Government Junior High School, Kargi Grant, Raipur and shall be paid salary. However, it would be open to the respondents, if they so desire, they can pass fresh orders, in accordance with law. 17. CLMA No. 13669 of 2013 also stands disposed of.