Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 602 (JK)

Anju Sudan v. State of J&K

2018-08-03

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA

body2018
JUDGMENT : D.S. Thakur, J. 1. The instant Letters Patent appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 30.05.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in SWP No. 1099/2018. 2. Briefly stated, the material facts are as under:- 3. The petitioner/appellant herein was deployed in Primary School Chapper, Zone Dandesar vide order dated 12.05.2017. However, by virtue of order dated 25.05.2018, passed by the Chief Education Officer, Dandesar, the petitioner/appellant herein was sought to be detached and sent to her original place of posing i.e. Middle School Chapper. The said action of the ZEO has its genesis in the circular dated 04.04.2018 issued by the Government, whereby it had accorded sanction to the cancellation of all the detachments ordered from time to time. The said Government order is reproduced here-in-below for facility of reference:- Government of Jammu & Kashmir School Education Department Civil Secretariat, Jammu *** Subject:- Cancellation of attachments of officers/officials including teaching staff of School Education Department –instructions thereof. Government Order No: 488-Edu of 2018 Dated: 04.04.2018 Sanction is hereby accorded to the cancellation of all attachments ordered from time-to-time of the officers/officials including teaching staff of the School Education Department, who are presently attached in other Departments with immediate effect. All detached employees shall be deemed to have been relieved with immediate effect and directed to report back to their original places of postings in the School Education Department where from they have been attached. Further, Directors of School Education, Kashmir/Jammu shall henceforth send consolidated reports of detachments in their respective Divisions to the Administrative Department for further action. By order of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir. Sd/- Secretary to the Government School Education Department No. Edu/Gen/83/2018 Dated: 04.04.2018 4. By virtue of the judgment and order impugned dated 30.05.2018, the Writ Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner/appellant herein, hence the present Letters Patent Appeal. The challenge to the order impugned is on three grounds. First that the order No. 488-Edu of 2018 dated 04.04.2018 was not applicable to the apellant’s case, inasmuch as, it applied only to such detachments of teachers, who had been attached in other departments. The second ground urged was that the Zonal Education Officer, Dandesar had no jurisdiction to order the cancellation of the detachment of the petitioner/appellant herein and the power, if any, was vested only in the CEO concerned. 5. The second ground urged was that the Zonal Education Officer, Dandesar had no jurisdiction to order the cancellation of the detachment of the petitioner/appellant herein and the power, if any, was vested only in the CEO concerned. 5. The third ground urged was that since the appellant stood regularized as an ReT, she could not have been transferred back to her original school of appointment, wherein she was originally appointed as an ReT. Reference in this regard is placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in case titled “Majid Alyas V/s State of J&K and others” reported in 2017(2) JKJ 322 . 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Insofar as, the first issue is concerned, the plea taken by the learned counsel for the appellant is untenable. The order dated 04.04.2018 is clear, inasmuch as, it accords sanction to the cancellation of all attachments ordered from time to time, including teaching staff of the School Education Department, presently attached in other departments. The order is quite comprehensive, as it pertained to not only the attachment of teachers within the department in various schools, but also attachment of teachers outside the School Education Department. 8. The second ground urged by the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to the issue of the jurisdiction of the ZEO to order the detachment of the petitioner. Even in this regard, we feel that the ZEO by virtue of order dated 25.05.2018 had only given effect to the Government order No. 488-Edu of 2018 dated 04.04.2018. The said order is not an order of transfer for which the powers might lie only with the CEO concerned. 9. The third point raised by the learned counsel for the appellant was that the appellant could not have been sent back to her original place of appointment as ReT, as it was contrary to the ratio of the judgment and order of the Division Bench of this Court supra. However, on a perusal of the order passed by the Division Bench,on which reliance is placed, we feel that same does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The order issued by the ZEO is certainly not an order of transfer but an order of detachment, therefore, reliance to the Division Bench judgment is misplaced. 10. However, on a perusal of the order passed by the Division Bench,on which reliance is placed, we feel that same does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The order issued by the ZEO is certainly not an order of transfer but an order of detachment, therefore, reliance to the Division Bench judgment is misplaced. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that the appellant is sought to be repatriated after detachment to MS Chappar. It is urged that there is no vacancy against which the appellant could be adjusted. In case, there is any such difficulty, the Director School Education, Jammu would look into the matter and pass appropriate orders with regard to the suitable adjustment of the appellant. However, the appellant is advised to join immediately at MS Chapper. 11. Having considered the matter in its entirety, we cannot persuade ourselves to take a view different from the one taken by the learned Writ Court. The appeal is found to be without any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed along with connected IA.