JUDGMENT : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties heard finally. 2. The petitioners are Primary Teachers. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.8449 of 2022 are working with Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad and petitioners in Writ Petition No.6387 of 2022 are working with Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar. 3. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.8449 of 2022 have put forth prayer Clauses ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ as under :- (B) That this Hon’ble Court may please to pass necessary writ order or direction in like nature and quash and set aside the impugned communication dated 20/06/2022 issued by respondent no.2 to the extent of clause no.3 being arbitrary. (C) That this Hon’ble Court may please to pass necessary writ, order or direction in like nature and quash and set aside the condition of 5 years of service on existing school mentioned under the new policy of transfer dated 07/04/2021 and more particularly clause no.1, 10 of the said Govt. Resolution. (D) That this Hon’ble Court may please to pass necessary writ, order or direction in like nature and direct the respondent no.3, 4 and 5 to decide the representations/applications filed by the petitioners dated 19/07/2022 as expeditiously as possible. 4. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.6387 of 2022 have put forth prayer Clauses ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘E’ as under :- (B) By issuing writ of Mandamus, or any appropriate writ or order or directions in the like nature, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners and apply/use the new list for difficult area issued on 08.06.2022 by the respondent No.4 for intra-district transfers as per their representation dated 13.06.2022. (C) By issuing writ of Mandamus, or any appropriate writ or order or directions in the like nature, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned communication dated 13.06.2022 issued by respondent No.5 as Exh.-G. (D) By issuing writ of Mandamus, or any appropriate writ or order or directions in the like nature, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.4 to decide the representation dated 03.06.2022 filed by the petitioner as Exh.-“H”. (E) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, to direct the respondent No.4 to apply/use the new list for difficult area issued on 08.06.2022 by the respondent No.4 for intra-district transfers as per their representation dated 13.06.2022. 5. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Suvidh S. Kulkarni and learned Advocate Mr. A. G. Ambetkar for petitioners in respective petitions, also heard learned AGP Mr. S. G. Karlekar for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Advocate Mr. A.D. Aghav for respondent Nos.4 and 5. 6. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent No.1 State of Maharashtra has issued a Government Resolution (G.R.) dated 27/02/2017 wherein the State has taken a policy decision with regard to the transfers of Teachers working in the establishment of Zilla Parishad. In the said G.R. for the first time, the State of Maharashtra has classified every district in two parts. The first is, a difficult area ( vo?kM {ks= ), and the second is, normal area ( loZlk/kkj.k {ks= ). As far as difficult area is concerned, it defined to mean a hilly area where there is no mode of transport and far from the head office of taluka place. It is the policy of the Government that if a Teacher had worked in a difficult area for continues period of three years and has completed his ten years of service, he would be eligible for seeking transfer at the place of his choice and he was entitled to seek transfer under the caption of categories (Special Category Teacher – Part I). 7. It is the case of the petitioners that they are working in their respective schools and are eligible to seek transfer under the Special Category Teacher – Part I. By the above G.R. dated 27/02/2017, the Government has superseded its earlier G.R. which repeals all the old G.R. governing the transfer of the Teachers from the difficult areas to the normal areas. The earlier policies of the State with regard to the transfer of the Teachers has been superseded by the said G.R. On 04/05/2022, respondent No.1/State Government has issued a G.R. whereby the annual period was supposed to be considered till 30th June for the year 2022. 8. The earlier policies of the State with regard to the transfer of the Teachers has been superseded by the said G.R. On 04/05/2022, respondent No.1/State Government has issued a G.R. whereby the annual period was supposed to be considered till 30th June for the year 2022. 8. In pursuance of G.R. dated 07th April, 2021, issued by the State Government, the respondent No.4 Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, had taken survey of the entire district and after taking due survey with regard to the conditions mentioned in the Schedule, respondent No.4 has declared a list of schools for the year 2022 identifying therein the schools coming under the purview of difficult schools. It is pointed out by the petitioners that they are working in such schools which are now declared to be in the ‘difficult area’. From the list it is apparent that the schools which were earlier in the normal areas, are now being declared as schools in ‘difficult area’. 9. The petitioners, thereafter, made a representation to the State Government wherein they contended that they had already worked in the difficult area schools for a period of ten years and are entitled for a transfer. 10. The primary challenge of the petitioners is to the subsequent G.R. whereby the petitioners are required to work in the difficult area for three years in order to be eligible for transfer. It is the case of the petitioners that they are already entitled to be transferred by virtue of their earlier work in the ‘presumed to be’ difficult area. It is the further contention of the petitioners that as the schools have been declared to be in difficult area later by virtue of the 2021 Government Notification, their earlier service in the same area should be considered to be in ‘difficult area’, although the schools were not considered to be in difficult area prior to 2021 and there was no such stipulation at an earlier point of time. 11. 11. The petitioners, in their rejoinder affidavit have given a chart as to their existence position in the difficult and plain areas as per the G.R. dated 27/02/2017 and as per the G.R. dated 07/04/2021, it is as under:- Sr No Name of the petitioners Post Name of the School Taluka First Date of appointment As per 27.02.2017 school in difficult or plain area As per 07.04.2021 school in difficult or plain area Working period in present school 1. Sandip Ramdas Kawade Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Anagare, Tq.Shrigonda, Di.Ahmednagar Shrigonda 12/06/2006 Plain area Difficult area 4 years 2 Sandip Ashok Magar Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Arvi, Tq. Shrigonda, Di.Ahmednagar Shrigonda 12/08/2011 Plain area Difficult area 5 years 3. Sharad Baburao Gawade Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Arvi Punarvasn Tq. Shrigonda, Di.Ahmednagar Shrigonda a 14/09/2007 Plain area Difficult area a 4 year 4. Hariprasad Balasaheb Shinde Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Wadachiwadi, (Gundegaon), Tq.Nagar, Dist. Ahmednagar Nagar 21/12/2010 Plain area Difficult area 11 years 6 months 5. Bhausaheb Sahebrao Jadhav Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Anandmala (Gundegaon), Tq.Nagar, Dist. Ahmednagar Nagar 10/12/2001 Plain area Difficult area 11 years 6 months 6. Dadasaheb Yadav Thombare Assistant Teacher Assistant Teacher Nagar 21/12/2010 Plain area Difficult area 11 years 6 months 7 Vinayak Sakharam Thube Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Pawarwadi (Dhavalpuri) Tq.Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar Parner 05/08/2010 Plain area Difficult area 6 years 8. Ankush Ananda Bhoite Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Anagare Tq.Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar Shrigonda 07/01/2008 Plain area Difficult area 6 years 9. Ramesh Bhagwan Zende Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Pawarwadi Ajnuj Tq. Shrigonda Dist. Ahmednagar Shrigonda 29/06/1998 8 Plain area Difficult area 4 years 10 Swati Dilip Kale Assistant Teacher Zilla Parishad Primary School Pawarwadi, Ajnuj Tq.Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar Shrigonda 19/08/2004 Plain area Difficult area 4 years 12. It is the contention of the petitioners that since the schools have now been declared to be in ‘difficult area’ under the government resolution dated 07/04/2021, they should be treated as ‘difficult area’, retrospectively, for all past purposes from 2017 onwards. The logic in that, the school suddenly does not become ‘difficult area’ today. It was in a ‘plain area’ earlier, and therefore, they are eligible to be transferred after working in ‘difficult area’ for three years and ten years in the ‘plain area’. The logic in that, the school suddenly does not become ‘difficult area’ today. It was in a ‘plain area’ earlier, and therefore, they are eligible to be transferred after working in ‘difficult area’ for three years and ten years in the ‘plain area’. In view of the clarification of school in ‘difficult area’ as provided under a new G.R. of 2021, they be declared to have served in the ‘difficult area’ right from their appointments and not from the date of declarations of the area as a ‘difficult area’. 13. The petitioners are challenging the validity of communication dated 20/06/2022 to the extent of clause No.3 of which last lines read as under :- OTHER LANGUAGE (However, if a school currently in an accessible area is declared as a difficult area as per the provisions of the Government Resolution dated 07/04/2021, the service of the teachers in such a school shall be deemed to be service in a difficult area from the date of declaration as a difficult area or from the date of acceptance of appointment in that school, whichever is later. It should be noted that once a teacher is declared in a difficult area, the teacher will not be eligible for transfer) 14. Although the submissions of the petitioners are attractive, it is to be noted that in the new G.R. dated 07/04/2021, new conditions are incorporated which were not in the earlier G.R. of 2017, to declare a area as ‘difficult area’ thereby making even a school under ‘plain area’ into a ‘difficult area’. The logic of the petitioners is that once an area is declared as ‘difficult area’, it is to be treated as difficult for all past purposes even as per the earlier G.R., thus which cannot be accepted. 15. It is, thus, obvious that the government has simplified the conditions which were to be reckoned for defining an area as ‘difficult’. Logically, with development being introduced in the rural areas of India, basic amenities were provided to the people and this brought about a change by which villages got connected with urban areas. As such, the earlier difficult areas came closer to urban areas. However, what we find in these cases before us is that the State, sort of, relaxed the conditions which resulted in those areas which were not ‘difficult areas’ earlier, being treated as ‘difficult area’. This would, nevertheless, operate prospectively. As such, the earlier difficult areas came closer to urban areas. However, what we find in these cases before us is that the State, sort of, relaxed the conditions which resulted in those areas which were not ‘difficult areas’ earlier, being treated as ‘difficult area’. This would, nevertheless, operate prospectively. This would not amount to a ‘plain area’ being deemed to be a ‘difficult area’. We, therefore, cannot accept the contention of the petitioners to treat their earlier service in the ‘plain area’ as being in the ‘difficult area’. 16. The petitioners have to comply with the conditions in order to be eligible for transfer as per the G.R. dated 07/04/2021. Needless to state that, whatever period of their services that they have spent earlier in the ‘plain areas’, would not be cumulatively counted as the service in the ‘difficult area’ from 04/07/2021. We hereby reject the logic of the petitioners that the services in the ‘difficult area’ is to be treated as not being from the date of declaration of the area to be difficult, but from prior point before the date of declaration. 17. In view of the above, the petitions stand dismissed. Rule is discharged.