_*अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण कार्यक्रम की समय सारणी*_
➡ _1-पोर्टल पर आवेदन 9 से 14 जून_
➡ _2-बीएसए द्वारा सत्यापन व डेटा लाक कार्यवाही 10 से 18 जून_
➡ _3-एनआईसी द्वारा ट्रांसफर की कार्यवाही 19 जून से 22 जून_
➡ _4-ट्रांसफर के पश्चात कार्यमुक्ति 27 जून से_
चीफ जस्टिस बेंच: शिक्षक अंतर् जनपदीय ट्रांसफर के लिए कई बार आवेदन कर सकते हैं
चीफ जस्टिस बेंच ने महिला शिक्षकों की सिर्फ एक बार ट्रांसफर आवेदन देने के मोके को गलत माना, कहा की सिंगल बेंच से गलती हुई, ट्रांसफर नियमावली 1981 और 2008 में कहीं भी सिर्फ एक बार मौका देने को नहीं लिखा , और कहा की हमें शासनादेश में हस्तक्षेप करना पड़ रहा है के ट्रांसफर आवेदन में सिर्फ एक बार मौका देने को बाध्य नहीं किया जा सकता , और आगे भी आवेदन कर सकता है
Court - but could not show any provision to prohibit second application for inter-district transfer.
Government Order, imposing bar on second application for inter-district transfer, is not in consonance with the Rules; rather, de hors the statutory Rules. To that extent, we are entertaining this appeal and causing interference in the directions issued by the learned Single Judge prohibiting second application for inter-district transfer.
we cause interference in the order of the Government as well as the judgement of the learned Single Judge to clarify that as per Rule 21 of the Rules of 1981 so as Rule 8(2)(d) of the Rules of 2008, an employee would be at liberty to make application for inter-district transfer and it would not be restricted to only one application in his service tenure.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 29 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 466 of 2021 Appellant :- Shobha Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Seemant Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi,J.
In Re: Exemption Application Exemption application is allowed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is exempted from filing the certified copy of the judgment and order dated 03.11.2020, passed by this Court.
In Re: Special Appeal Heard Shri Seemant Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
This appeal has been preferred against the judgement dated 03.11.2020. An application to seek leave to appeal has been filed by the appellant because his rights are affected by the judgement.
The application to seek leave to appeal is allowed, as being not opposed by the petitioner/non-appellant so as the State Government and otherwise, we find that the appellant is affected by the outcome of the judgement under challenge.
The writ petition filed by the petitioners has been decided after detailed discussion of the issues. The learned Single Judge, thereupon, gave following directions for its general application:-
"64. Since in this judgment I have already held Clauses 2(1)(A),(B) of the Government order dated 2nd December, 2019 to be contrary and in conflict with the statutory rules contained under the posting Rules, 2008 and clause 16 to be contradictory to the clause 15 of the Government order and also defeating the very objective sought to be achieved under the posting rules, 2008 in the light of the objectives set forth under the Right to Free Education for all Act, 2009 and Clause 15 of the Government Order dated 2.12.2019 be read down in the light of the observations made earlier in this judgment for female candidates as they may be specially circumstanced, I come to conclude with following observations/ directions to be necessarily kept in mind before finalizing the list of teachers seeking inter-district transfer:-
(I) No inter district transfer shall be done in the mid of the academic session.
(II) Transfer application should be entertained strictly in the light of the provisions as contained in Rule 8(2)(a) (b) and (d) of the Posting Rules, 2008.
(III) Once a teacher has successfully exercised the option for inter district transfer, no second opportunity shall be afforded to any teacher of any category except in case of female teacher who has already availed benefit of inter district transfer on the ground of parents dependency, prior to her marriage. However, in case if the marriage has taken place then she will have only one opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer either on the ground of parents dependency or spouse residence/ in-laws residence.
(IV) In case of grave medical emergency for any incurable or serious disease that may as of necessity, require immediate medical help and sustained medical treatment, either personally or for the spouse, a second time opportunity to apply for inter district transfer should be afforded to such a teacher even if he/she had exercised such option for inter district transfer for any other reason in the past.
(V) Application of differently abled person should have very sympathetic consideration looking to physical disability but they should also have only one time opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer. In case of female teachers, such exception would apply, as referable to rule 8(2) (d) of Posting Rules, 2008.
(VI) In case of female teacher's right to seek transfer, relaxation given under Rule 8(2)(d) shall be read with rule 8(2) (b) and relaxation shall, therefore, be subject to rule 8(2) (b).
(VII) Save as observed and directed herein above (Direction Nos.III, IV and V), no second opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer be made available to any candidate of any category whatsoever.
(VIII) The exercise of inter-district transfer since is exception to the general rule of appointment and posting, every application for transfer has to be addressed to by the competent authority keeping in mind the objectives set forth under the Act, 2009 and Posting Rules, 2008 as amended in the year 2010 and must be acceded to citing a special circumstance specific to the case considered."
The only question raised before us is with regard to denial of second application for inter-district transfer. The learned Single Judge has restricted the number of application to seek inter-district transfer. It has been directed that after one application, the employee would not be entitled to move second application for his inter-district transfer; other than, in the exceptional circumstances carved out by the learned Single Judge. The direction, aforesaid, is said to be in violation of Rule 21 of the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981(hereinafter referred to as, 'the Rules of 1981') and Rule 8 of the U.P. Teachers Posting Rules, 2008 (hereinafter called as, 'the Rules of 2008'). Both the Rules are quoted herein-below for a ready reference:-
"Rule 21 of the Rules of 1981: 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.
Rule 8 of the Rules of 2008: Posting - (1) (a) Three options for schools shall be asked from the handicapped candidates in order of their merit and after receiving such option the handicapped candidates shall be posted on the basis of option given by them and the vacancies.
(b) Based on the order of their merit, female teachers would be required to submit under their signature option of three schools each from the general and backward block and accordingly, posting would be given in one of these schools.
(c) The posting of male teachers shall be made in accordance with the order of candidates in the roster prepared under Rule 7.
(2)(a) The newly appointed male teachers shall initially be posted compulsorily in backward areas for a period of at least five years.
(b) Newly appointed female teachers shall also be compulsorily posted in backward area for a period of at least two years.
(c) Mutual transfers within the district from general block and backward block and vice-versa would be permitted with the condition that the teacher on mutual transfer to a backward block shall have to serve in that block compulsorily for five years. Mutual transfers would be permitted only in case of those teachers who have more than remaining five year's service.
(d) In normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teachers will not be entertained within five years of their posting. But under special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfers in respect of female teachers would be entertained to the place of residence of their husband or in law's district.
(e) If by virtue of posting of newly appointed or promoted teachers the primary and upper primary schools of backward blocks get saturated i.e. no post of teacher is vacant in these schools, then handicapped and female teachers on their choice can be adjusted against the vacant posts of general blocks from these saturated blocks.
(f) Mutual transfers of male/female teachers from one backward blocks to another can be considered.
(3) Teachers transferred from one district to another will be given posting as per the provision of these rules."
Rule 21 of the Rules of 1981, quoted above, imposes a bar on 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.
The transfer from one district to another has not been permitted as a course, but can be made on the request or with the consent of the teacher. Rule 8 of the Rules of 2008 also provides that in normal circumstances, the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teachers will not be entertained within five years of their posting, but under special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfers in respect of female teachers would be entertained to the place of residence of their husband or in law's district. Both the rules do not preclude number of applications for seeking inter-district transfers.
In view of the above, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that there was no occasion for the learned Single Judge to bar second application for inter-district transfer. The transfer of teachers, otherwise, remains in the domain of the State Government and thereby, mere submission of the application does not create any right in favour of the employee to seek transfer. It remains at the discretion of the Government. If a teacher gives one application for inter-district transfer and is accepted, the Rule does not bar further transfer by making an application. It is more so, when, on seeking inter-district transfer, one loses his seniority. He/she is placed at the bottom of the seniority of the district he/she is transferred.
The restraint imposed by the learned Single Judge on second application for inter-district transfer is de hors the Rules.
The counsel for the petitioner has supported the appeal. He submits that there was no prayer in the writ petition to prohibit second application for inter-district transfer after first application has been accepted or rejected; rather, the Government Order, imposing prohibition to make second application for inter-district transfer, was challenged. It was for the reason that the condition imposed by the administrative order was de hors the Rules. When the Rules do not prohibit second application, it could not have been imposed by an administrative order.
The prayer is, accordingly, to modify the judgement of the learned Single Judge by accepting the appeal.
The counsel appearing for the State has, initially, opposed the appeal, but could not show any provision to prohibit second application for inter-district transfer. In a case where the first application for inter-district transfer is accepted and one is transferred to another district, the Rules do not cast a bar on another application later on to seek inter-district transfer. It is specially when making an application does not create a right of transfer. The transfer, otherwise, affects the employee in order of seniority. The learned Standing Counsel is fair enough to accept that there is no bar under the Rules to prohibit second application for inter-district transfer.
In view of the above, we find that the Government Order, imposing bar on second application for inter-district transfer, is not in consonance with the Rules; rather, de hors the statutory Rules. To that extent, we are entertaining this appeal and causing interference in the directions issued by the learned Single Judge prohibiting second application for inter-district transfer. It is, however, with the clarity that mere making of application would not mean a right to get transferred; rather, it would remain at the discretion of the State Government. It is furthermore that if the Government permits inter-district transfer, the employee would be placed at the bottom of the seniority in the district where he/she is transferred.
With the aforesaid, we cause interference in the order of the Government as well as the judgement of the learned Single Judge to clarify that as per Rule 21 of the Rules of 1981 so as Rule 8(2)(d) of the Rules of 2008, an employee would be at liberty to make application for inter-district transfer and it would not be restricted to only one application in his service tenure. It is again with the clarification that mere making of an application would not create a right to get transferred; rather, it would remain at the discretion of the Government.
If any employee has been affected by the outcome of the judgement in question, he would be at liberty to take the remedy individually challenging the order of transfer.
The appeal is allowed with the aforesaid.
Order Date :- 15.7.2021 LN Tripathi
कोर्ट ने एस्पिरेशनल डिस्ट्रिक्ट से महिला शिक्षकों की विशिष्ट परिस्थिति को जाँच ट्रांसफर का मौका देने को कहा गया
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AFR Judgment Reserved on : 14.09.2022 Judgment Delivered on: 23.11.2022 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17977 of 2021 Petitioner :- Manju Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma,Lakshmi Kant Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6262 of 2022 Petitioner :- Alka Malik Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Jai Krishna Tiwari With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5961 of 2022 Petitioner :- Pooja Jaiswal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13587 of 2022 Petitioner :- Heena Parveen Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Daya Ram With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13798 of 2022 Petitioner :- Nazneem Fatima Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13900 of 2022 Petitioner :- Deepshiksha Kesharwani Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Arun Kumar With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3203 of 2022 Petitioner :- Deepti Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nitin Kumar Tiwari,Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar Sharma,Jai Krishna Tiwari,Navin Kumar Sharma,A/N0128,Archana Singh With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13909 of 2022 Petitioner :- Dipali Vishnoi Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16268 of 2022 Petitioner :- Neeraj Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16307 of 2022 Petitioner :- Mahe Anjum Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma,Ganesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh With Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14492 of 2022 Petitioner :- Manju Lata And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archana Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
1. All the above referred writ petitions involve identical questions of law and facts. The Writ Petition (A) No.17977 of 2021 is being treated as the leading writ petition and the facts pertaining to the same is being considered for deciding the controversy involved.
2. Heard Sri Navin Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pranesh Dutt Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents Nos.2 & 4 as also learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Respondents.
3. The writ petition (Writ-A No.17977 of 2021) has been filed assailing the order dated 31.12.2020 downloaded from the website of the U.P. Board of Basic Education, Prayagraj, whereby and whereunder the claim of the petitioner for Inter-District Transfer from Bahraich to Bareilly, has been rejected on the ground that the transfer sought was an aspirational district transfer and not permitted under the Government Order dated 02.12.2019.
4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School in District Bahraich vide order dated 31.12.2015 and joined her services on 01.01.2016. In the year 2019 the petitioner was placed in Primary School Ahiraura, Block Chhitaura, District Bahraich under placement order dated 05.12.2019 and joined the said institution on 16.12.2019. The husband of the petitioner is running a business in District Bareilly. The petitioner has two children, 11 years old and 3 years old and both are residing at Bareilly along with their father and grandparents. The petitioner herself is a cancer patient whose treatment is going on at Kishlata Cancer Hospital, Bareilly. The petitioner is stated to be on medical leave and undergoing chemotherapy at Bareilly. The cancer has also affected the lungs of the petitioner and she is also undergoing treatment for her lung ailment at Yashoda Cancer Institute at Ghaziabad. Relevant documents have been filed on record to establish that the petitioner is a cancer patient and is undergoing treatment. The petitioner has sought Inter-District Transfer on medical grounds considering her ailment to District Bareilly from District Bahraich her present place of posting.
5. It is contended that the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules, 2008 have been framed under Section 19 (1) of the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972. Rule 8 of the 2008 Rules provides for Inter-District Transfer. Rule 21 of the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 also relates to transfer of the teachers. The State Government has issued a Government Order dated 02.12.2019 laying down the policy for the year 2019-20 for Inter-District Transfer. Clause 13 of the Government Order dated 02.12.2019 imposes restriction upon the teachers appointed in the aspirational districts like Siddharth Nagar, Shravasti, Bahraich, Sonebhadra, Chandauli, Fatehpur, Chitrakoot and Balrampur. The Clause 13 of the Government Order dated 2.12.2019 is being reproduced here under:-
"13. आकांक्षी (Aspirational) जनपदों यथा-सिद्धार्थनगर, श्रावस्ती, बहराइच, सोनभद्र, चन्दौली, फतेहपुर, चित्रकूट एवं बलरामपुर में से प्रत्येक जनपद से उतने ही अध्यापकों को अन्यत्र जनपदों में स्थानान्तरित किया जायेगा, जितने अध्यापकों द्वारा अन्य जनपदों से सम्बन्धित आकांक्षी जनपद में आने के लिए स्थानान्तरण हेतु अनुरोध किया जायेगा। परन्तु, यह प्रावधान भारतीय सेना/वायु सेना/नौ सेना/अर्ध सैनिक बलों यथा, CRPF/ CISF/ SSB/ASSAM RIFLES/ITBP/NSG/BSF, से सम्बन्धित प्रकरणों पर लागू नही होगा। "
6. The Government Order dated 02.12.2019 came to be challenged in a bunch of writ petitions leading amongst them being Writ (A) No.878 of 2020 (Divya Goswami Vs. State of U.P. and others). The writ petition was finally decided vide order dated 03.11.2020. The Court concluded that the following observations/directions be necessarily kept in mind before finalizing the list of teachers seeking inter-district transfer:-
"(I) No inter district transfer shall be done in the mid of the academic session.
(II) Transfer application should be entertained strictly in the light of the provisions as contained in Rule 8(2)(a) (b) and (d) of the Posting Rules, 2008.
(III) Once a teacher has successfully exercised the option for inter district transfer, no second opportunity shall be afforded to any teacher of any category except in case of female teacher who has already availed benefit of inter district transfer on the ground of parents dependency, prior to her marriage. However, in case if the marriage has taken place then she will have only one opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer either on the ground of parents dependency or spouse residence/ in-laws residence.
(IV) In case of grave medical emergency for any incurable or serious disease that may as of necessity, require immediate medical help and sustained medical treatment, either personally or for the spouse, a second time opportunity to apply for inter district transfer should be afforded to such a teacher even if he/she had exercised such option for inter district transfer for any other reason in the past.
(V) Application of differently abled person should have very sympathetic consideration looking to physical disability but they should also have only one time opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer. In case of female teachers, such exception would apply, as referable to rule 8(2) (d) of Posting Rules, 2008.
(VI) In case of female teacher's right to seek transfer, relaxation given under Rule 8(2)(d) shall be read with rule 8(2) (b) and relaxation shall, therefore, be subject to rule 8(2) (b).
(VII) Save as observed and directed herein above (Direction Nos.III, IV and V), no second opportunity to exercise option for inter district transfer be made available to any candidate of any category whatsoever.
(VIII) The exercise of inter-district transfer since is exception to the general rule of appointment and posting, every application for transfer has to be addressed to by the competent authority keeping in mind the objectives set forth under the Act, 2009 and Posting Rules, 2008 as amended in the year 2010 and must be acceded to citing a special circumstance specific to the case considered."
7. The order dated 03.11.2020 was modified by the Court vide order dated 03.12.2020 to the extent that and the Direction No.1 in the order dated 03.11.2020 would not be pressed in the cases of medical emergency thus permitting transfers in mid academic session. The medical emergency cases were required to be dealt with by the Government strictly in accordance with its own guidelines and the prescribed procedure to identify such cases which were to be religiously followed.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the decision of this Court in the case of Divya Goswami (supra) the State Government issued Government Order dated 15.12.2020 and circular dated 17.12.2020. Both the Government Order dated 15.12.2020 and the circular did not contain any restriction with regard to aspirational districts. He submits that Clause 13 of the Government Order dated 02.12.2019 provided that from the aspirational districts only such number of teachers would be transferred as the number of requests for transfer from other districts to the said districts are received. The Government Order dated 02.12.2019 having been struck down by this Court and the State Government having issued the Government Order dated 15.12.2020 and circular dated 17.12.2020 which did not provide anything about the aspirational districts, the inter-district transfer request of the petitioner was required to be considered positively and was not liable to be rejected. Reliance is also placed upon a Government Order dated 29.03.2018 which provides in Clause II(vii) that transfers out of aspirational districts could be considered after two years of the posting by accepting options. Reliance is also placed upon information received under the Right to Information Act from Government of India, Niti Ayog, New Delhi obtained on 18.01.2021 to demonstrate that now no restrictions have been imposed by the Central Government as regards Inter District Transfers of Teachers and the same is within the domain of the State Government. It is thus contended that in the absence of any restrictions imposed by subsequent Government Orders regarding Inter-District Transfers the request of transfer of the petitioner is liable to be considered under Rule 8 of the Rules, 2008 and Rule 21 of the 1981 Rules.
9. Per contra, Smt. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 has resisted by the writ petition by filing counter affidavit sworn by the Block Education Officer District Bahraich and submits that the entire proceedings of Inter-District Transfer of teachers working in Institutions run by the Basic Education Board is done through a software developed by NIC in accordance with the provisions contained in the Government Order issued by the Basic Education Department. For the Academic Session 2019-20, a transfer policy was framed vide Government Order dated 02.12.2019. Clause 13 of the Government Order imposes restriction upon Inter-District Transfers and provides that from the districts Siddharth Nagar, Shravasti, Bahraich, Sonebhadra, Chandauli, Fatehpur, Chitrakoot and Balrampur only such number of teachers would be transferred as the number of requests for transfer from other districts to the said districts are received. The validity of the said clause has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ (A) No.9177 of 2021 (Aradhana and another vs. State of U.P. & 5 others) decided on 05.08.2021. Clause 8 of the Government Order dated 02.12.2019 provides for fixation of preferential points and the transfer requests shall be entertained on the basis of the preferential points obtained by each candidate seeking transfer.
10. It is next contended by learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 that the writ petitioner in her online application (Registration No.50374966) opted for being transferred to district Bareilly, Pilibhit and Budaun. The petitioner has been awarded 4 marks for tenure of service, 10 marks for serious disease of self, 5 marks for being female teacher, total marks 19 but her case has not been considered on account of transfer being sought from aspirational districts as the same has been restricted by Clause 13 of the Government Order dated 02.12.2019. The petitioner, admittedly, does not fall under any of the exempted categories under the said Clause. It is submitted that the claim of transfer from aspirational districts has been laid to rest by a decision this Court dated 13.8.2018 passed in Writ (A) No.14395 of 2018 (Smt. Ruchi vs. State of U.P. and others) and 126 connected writ petitions by holding that the writ petitioners working in aspirational districts have no right for Inter District Transfer. Petitioner does not have any legally protected or judicially enforceable subsisting right to ask for mandamus for transfer from the aspirational district. Therefore her application for Inter-District Transfer have been lawfully rejected in view of the decision of the Board.
11. It is further submitted that the post of Assistant Teacher in Primary School is a district level cadre and Inter-District Transfer is an exceptional measure not to be made routinely except in terms of Rule 21 of the 1981 Rules. It is thus submitted that the writ petition is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner has refuted the averments made in the counter affidavit by filing rejoinder affidavit. It is submitted that the respondents have been adopting pick and choose policy in affecting the inter-district transfers. At one instance the genuine transfer request of the petitioner has been denied on the ground that the transfer is being sought from an aspirational district and on the other hand several transfers have been affected from aspirational districts of Bahraich to Hapur, Bahraich to Lakhimpur Kheri, Bahraich to Unnao, Bahraich to Barabanki. Documents to substantiate the plea have been filed as Annexures RA-1 to RA-6. It is further contended that the case of the writ petitioner is liable to be considered in the light of the decision of this Court in the case of Divya Goswami (Supra).
13. Having heard the respective learned counsels for the parties and having perused the record, the Court finds that the case of the writ petitioner has not be considered only on the ground that the transfer is being sought from an aspirational district and such transfers from aspirational districts have been not permitted by Clause 13 of the Government Order dated 02.12.2019.
14. The Court further finds that the aspirational districts programme was launched by the Prime Minister in January, 2018 which aimed to quickly and effectively transform 112 most under developed districts across the country. The broad contours of the programme are convergence (of Central, State Schemes) Collaboration (of Central, State Level Nodal Officers & District Collectors) and competition among districts through monthly delta ranking; all driven by a mass movement. This programme focuses on the strength of each district, identifying low handing fruits for immediate improvement and measuring progress by ranking districts on a monthly basis. The ranking is based on the incremental progress made across 49 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) under 5 Broad Socio-Economic Themes i.e. Health and Nutrition, Education, Agriculture & Water Resources, Financial Inclusion & Skill Development and Infrastructure.
15. The Court further finds that a Coordinate Bench of this Court while dealing with the issues of Inter-District Transfers as also the Government Order dated 02.12.2019 laying down the Transfer Policy for 2019-20 in the case of Divya Goswami (Supra) deliberately did not deal with the Inter-District Transfers from aspirational districts and to the restrictions imposed by Clause 13 of the Government Order dated 02.12.2019 presumably on the ground that the issue of transfer from aspirational districts stood decided by the decisions rendered in Writ (A) No.9177 of 2021 (Aradhana and another Vs. State of U.P. & 5 others) as also Writ (A) No.14395 of 2018 (Smt. Ruchi Vs. State of U.P. & others) and 126 connected writ petitions holding that candidates working in aspirational districts have no right to seek transfer from aspirational districts. However, the Transfer Policy evolved subsequent to the decision of this Court in the case of Divya Goswami (Supra) vide Government Order dated 15.12.2020 and Circular dated 17.12.2020 do not impose any restriction for Inter-District Transfer from aspirational districts. In the opinion of the Court, the request of the petitioner for transfer from District Bahraich to District Bareilly is required to be sympathetically considered in the light of the provisions of the U.P. Basic Education Teachers (Posting) Rules 2008, read with Rule 21 of the Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 as also any policy framed by the State Government for Inter-District Transfer. Admittedly, no policy for effecting Inter-District Transfer is in vogue currently.
16. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the Basic Institution is a Member of District Level Cadre, which has been allotted to her after considering the preference of the teachers concerned. Being a Member of of District Level Cadre, the petitioner is required to remain posted within the cadre and transfer beyond the cadre/outside the district is ordinarily not concerned under the Rules. A transfer outside the district can be considered in normal circumstances only in accordance with the Rules. Rule 8(2)(d) of the Posting Rules, 2008 provides that in normal circumstances the applications for Inter-District Transfer of Female Teachers will not the entertained before 5 years of completing their posting. However, the Rule contemplates that in exceptional or extra-ordinary circumstances an application for transfer can be considered by the Basic Education Board/Director (Basic Education) even before the expiry of such term. The question whether in a given case the exceptional or extra-ordinary circumstances exists or not has to be examined by the Basic Education Board/Director (Basic Education).
17. In such circumstance, the writ petition stands disposed of by permitting the petitioner to represent the matter before the Director, Basic Education, U.P., annexing all the materials in support of her plea that there exists exceptional circumstances justifying her transfer from district Bahraich to district Bareilly along with certified copy of the order of this Court within two weeks from today.
18. In the eventuality of such a representation being filed within the time allowed, it is expected that the Director, Basic Education, U.P., shall examine as to whether the ground on which the petitioner is seeking her transfer would fall within the exceptional circumstances or not and pass a reasoned and speaking order within further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner along with certified copy of this order.
19. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations/ directions.
Order Date :- 23.11.2022 pks (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
पति पत्नी अगर दोनो सरकारी सेवा में है तो दोनो को यथा संभव निकटस्थ पोस्टिंग , कोर्ट डायरेक्शन
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12292 of 2019 Petitioner :- Soma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Verma Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sri Shashi Kant Verma, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 & 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher by the District Basic Shisha Adhikari vide order dated 5.9.2018 and posted at Primary School Kota, Block Obara, District Sonbhadra and submitted her joining on 1.10.2018. Husband of petitioner is a computer operator in Police Department, U.P. and posted at District Rampur, which is at very long distance from District Sonbhadra.
He next submitted that as per Para 1 of Sub-para Gha of Transfer Policy of State Goverment dated 3.5.2017 provides that if husband and wife both are in service, as far as possible, they shall be posted at one place.
He further submitted this Court in the matter of Bibha Singh Kushwaha Vs. U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad and 3 others has held that if husband and wife both are in service, they shall be posted at same place.
Petitioner moved an application dated 8.7.2019 before the respondent no.2 for her transfer from District Sonbhadra to Rampur or nearby Districts i.e. Moradabad, Amroha and Bijnor, but till date same has not been decided. Lastly, he submitted that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner and transfer the petitioner to District Rampur or other adjoining Districts.
Mr. Shashi Kant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that application of the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to consider and decide the application of the petitioner dated 8.7.2019 strictly in accordance with law maximum within four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioner is also given liberty to file fresh application alongwith certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that Court has not adjudicated the case on merits and it is upon the respondent no.2 to decide the application of the petitioner after considering the Rules and Government Order occupying the field.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 Junaid
बेसिक शिक्षा विभाग में शिक्षकों का दोबारा ट्रांसफर संभव , इलाहबाद हाई कोर्ट का आदेश
शिक्षिका ने पहला ट्रांसफर कुशीनगर से फिरोजाबाद में 2013 में लिया था , उसके बाद शिक्षिका की शादी गौतमबुद्ध नगर स्थित शिक्षक से वर्ष 2014 में हो गयी , उनके दूसरी बार स्थानांतरण की प्रार्थना को विभाग ने ख़ारिज कर दिया था , जिस पर कोर्ट ने उसको सही नहीं माना और शिक्षिका को दोबारा ट्रांसफर के लिए
विभाग को इस पर विचार करने के लिए कहा
Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10048 of 2018
Petitioner :- Smt. Richa Shukla And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandrakesh Rai
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that the controversy raised in the present petition has already been answered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 8075 of 2018. The order of this Court dated 2.4.2018 reads as under:-
"Petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Primary School and was posted at Kushi Nagar. After such initial appointment in the year 2009, petitioner sought her transfer and the same was allowed in the year 2013, whereby the petitioner was transferred to Firozabad. Petitioner contends that she got married in the year 2014 and that her husband, who is also an Assistant Teacher is posted at District- Gautam Budh Nagar. Petitioner accordingly has made her claim for transfer to Gautam Budh Nagar. Such claim of the petitioner, apparently, has been rejected on the ground that petitioner since has already been transferred in the past, and as such a prayer for transfer made on second occasion, cannot be considered. Clause-3 of the Government Order dated 13.06.2017 is relied upon for the purpose.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the service condition of petitioner are governed by the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting Rule-2008). Clause 8(2)(d) of the Rule is relied upon which reads as under:-
"(d) In normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teachers will not be entertained within five years of their posting. But under special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfers in respect of female teachers would be entertained to the place of residence of their husband or in law's district."
It is stated that the object and the provision clearly intends to protect the interest of a lady so that she is allowed be posted at a place where her husband is working. In the Rule, there is no provision which restricts such transfer in case the petitioner has availed of the transfer prior in point of time. The condition contained in the Government Order that such transfer would be considered only if it has not been availed in the past would ordinarily be followed but once the very object contained in the rule is shown to be frustrated, the Government Order would have to bend so as to secure the objective contained in the Rule itself. The decision of the respondents, therefore, not to consider petitioner's application for transfer cannot be sustained for the reasons recorded therein.
Rejection of petitioner's application therefore is set aside.
A direction is issued to the respondent No.2 to consider the petitioner's claim for transfer in terms of Rule-8(2)(d) of the Rules.
Such consideration shall be made by the authority concerned within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order".
Since the rejection of petitioner's� application for transfer is on identical ground, the order impugned dated 4.4.2018 cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed.�
Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the orders passed in Writ Petition No. 8075 of 2018.
Order Date :- 17.4.2018
News - इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट ने खारिज कर दी थी 2nd time ट्रांसफर याचिका -
|
?Court No. - 88
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 878 of 2020
Petitioner :- Divya Goswami
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jai Krishna Tiwari
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
In Re: Modification application no. 10 of� 2021
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State.
By means of this application further modification has been sought in the judgdment passed by me on 03.11.2020 qua direction no. (III) of paragraph 64.
The modification is sought on the ground that if the transfer has been sought earlier on the ground of parents' dependency by a female teacher then one more opportunity be extended to take benefit for second time on the ground of residence and in-laws.
At this stage, learned Additional Advocate General has informed the Court that judgment and order of this Court, which is sought to be further modified by means of modification application had already been put to challenge by means of Special Appeal (Def.) no. 48 of 2021, which has been dismissed.
In the considered opinion of the Court, once the judgement has been passed, the Court becomes functus officio and it is not permissible in law to entertain miscellaneous applications except the application for review. Further, since my judgment and directions contained therein have already been upheld in special appeal (supra), there is all the more reason not to interference in propriety with my order in any modification application.
In view of above, application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.2.2021
Sanjeev
UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,
CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET / RTET, BETET / Bihar TET, PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
बेसिक शिक्षकों का तबादला - ऑनलाइन सॉफ्टवेयर से,जोइनिंग नियुक्ति तिथि से, स्कूल कैसे मिलेंगे देखें :
बेसिक शिक्षकों का तबादला - ऑनलाइन सॉफ्टवेयर से,जोइनिंग नियुक्ति तिथि से, स्कूल कैसे मिलेंगे देखें :
69000 भर्ती के विधवाओं व महिलाओं को दे दिए दूरदराज के स्कूल, बताया गया कि पहले एकल व बन्द विद्यालयों में होगी तैनाती
परिषदीय स्कूलों में हुए स्थानांतरण की सूची प्रकाशन के बाद शिक्षकों का रिलीबिंग आदेश जारी, साथ में नवनियुक्त शिक्षक भी पायेंगे स्कूलों में तैनाती
उत्तर प्रदेश के परिषदीय स्कूलों में कार्यरत शिक्षकों के हाल ही में हुए स्थानांतरण में शासन द्वारा सूची निकलने के बाद प्रक्रिया रुक सी गयी थी जिसके तहत सभी शिक्षक परिषद से रिलीबिंग आदेश का इंतज़ार करने लगे। यह इंतज़ार इतना लंबा हो गया था कि शैक्षिक संगठनों ने भी अपने मांग पत्रों में स्थानांतरण की प्रक्रिया को जल्द से जल्द करने की शासन से सिफारिश की जिसके चलते आज शासन ने प्रक्रिया पूरी करने का आदेश दे दिया।
नाटकीय ढंग से बढ़ रही शिक्षकों की स्थानांतरण प्रकिया अब क्लाइमेक्स की ओर बढ़ती जा रही है जहाँ कब क्या हो जाये किसी को कोई अंदेशा नहीं। फ़िलहाल उत्तर प्रदेश के अनु सचिव सत्य प्रकाश ने महानिदेशक ,स्कूल शिक्षा विजय किरण आनंद को पत्र भेजकर अन्तर्जनपदीय स्थानान्तरण के फलस्वरूप स्थानान्तरित परिषदीय शिक्षकों के कार्यमुक्त एवं कार्यभार ग्रहण किये जाने के संबंध में आदेश दिया है, जिसमें कहा गया कि स्थानान्तरित अध्यापकों को कार्यमुक्त किये जाने तथा उनके विद्यालय आवंटन की कार्यवाही करते हुए स्थानंतरित शिक्षकों को
दिनांक 27 व 28 जनवरी 2021 तक कार्यमुक्त किया जाना सुनिश्चित किया जाय साथ ही कार्यमुक्त किये गये शिक्षकों की ज्वाइनिंग तथा पदस्थापना दिनांक 29 व 30 जनवरी 2021 को कराया जाना सुनिश्चित किया जाय। स्थानान्तरण के पश्चात कार्यभार ग्रहण करने वाले शिक्षकों की तैनाती नव चयनित अध्यापकों की तैनाती दिए गए निर्देशों के क्रम में पूर्ण की जाय ।
शासन स्तर से आदेश मिलते ही शिक्षकों ने स्थानांतरण प्रक्रिया के आगे बढ़ने से राहत की सांस ली है।स्थानांतरण प्रक्रिया के बार बार किसी न किसी कारण वश रुक जाने की वजह से शिक्षकों में उल्लास खत्म हो गया।शिक्षक कहते हैं कि जब 2019 में यह स्थानांतरण प्रकिया शुरू हुई थी तब घर पहुँचने की खुशी की बात ही अलग थी।अब प्रक्रिया पूरी हो जाये एवं दूसरे जनपद में पहुँचकर जब तक स्कूलों में जोईनिग नहीं ले लेते तब तक अत्यधिक खुशी ज़ाहिर करने जैसा कुछ नहीं है।
कुछ शिक्षकों की माने तो वो कहते है कि स्थानांतरण होने की खुशी इतनी बार मिली है कि इतनी खुशी इससे पहले कभी नहीं मिली।अब आदेश आने की खुशी मिली,फिर रिलीबिंग की ख़ुशी मिलेगी, फिर स्थानांतरित जनपद के स्कूल में जॉइनिंग की ख़ुशी मिलेगी और सबसे बाद में स्थानांतरित जनपद में पुनः वेतन शुरू होने की खुशी मिलेगी।
नाम न लिखने की बात कहकर एक शिक्षक कहते हैं कि शासन को अगले स्थानांतरण अभी से निकाल देने चाहिए जिससे अगले दो से चार साल में स्थानांतरण हो सकें
चुनावों से पहले बम्पर नियुक्तियां
बेसिक और माध्यमिक शिक्षा विभाग में 15508 एलटी ग्रेड शिक्षकों समेत 90 हजार पदों पर होगी भर्ती, विज्ञापन इसी माह
विशेष संवाददाता,लखनऊ
Last Modified: Mon, Jan 04 2021. 21:55 IST
up coming recruitment and jobs in uttar pradesh
चुनावी समर का आगाज हो चुका है। अन्य राजनीतिक दल जहां अपने वोट बैंक के साथ नई जमीन बनाने में लगे हैं तो राज्य सरकार भी अपने वादों को पूरा करने में तेजी से जुट गई है। युवाओं की निगाहें भर्तियों पर हैं। नए साल में सिर्फ बेसिक और माध्यमिक शिक्षा विभाग में ही लगभग 90 हजार पदों पर भर्तियां होनी हैं। इनमें से कुछ तो अगले छह महीने में पूरी हो जाएंगी।
इस वर्ष की सबसे पहले भर्ती माध्यमिक शिक्षा के सहायता प्राप्त स्कूलों में 15508 एलटी ग्रेड व प्रवक्ता के पदों पर होगी। इसके लिए विज्ञापन इसी महीने जारी होगा। हालांकि विज्ञापन बीते वर्ष भी जारी किया गया था लेकिन हाईकोर्ट के एक फैसले के बाद इसे रद्द कर दिया गया। अब इसे नए सिरे से जारी किया जाएगा। वहीं एडेड स्कूलों में लिपिकों के लगभग 2971 पदों पर भर्ती आधीनस्थ सेवा चयन आयोग से करवाई जा रही है।
वहीं विभाग में भी लिपिकों के लगभग 2000 पद खाली हैं। पहली बार राज्य सरकार एडेड स्कूलों के लिपिकों की भर्ती करने जा रही है। माध्यमिक शिक्षा के राजकीय इंटर कॉलेजों में भी एलटी ग्रेड के 8166 पदों पर भर्ती की घोषणा राज्य सरकार कर चुकी है। वर्ष 2018 में हुई 10768 एलटी ग्रेड भर्ती में 3 हजार से ज्यादा पद खाली रह गए हैं यानी लगभग 11 हजार पदों से भी ज्यादा पदों पर भर्ती भी जल्द ही होगी। लोक सेवा आयोग ये भर्तियां करेगा।
इसके अलावा प्रवक्ता के भी 1400 से ज्यादा पदों पर भर्ती के लिए लोक सेवा आयोग अधियाचन भेजा जा चुका है। सरकारी प्राइमरी स्कूलों में 69 हजार शिक्षक भर्ती पूरी होने वाली है। इसके बाद 51 हजार शिक्षक भर्ती भी करवाई जानी है। हालांकि इससे पहले राज्य सरकार को टीईटी भी करवानी है और फिर शिक्षक भर्ती की लिखित परीक्षा की तैयारी भी लिहाजा, ये भर्ती अप्रैल-मई के बाद ही शुरू होने की उम्मीद है।
बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद से सहायताप्राप्त जूनियर हाईस्कूलों में भी शिक्षकों के पदों पर सरकार पहली बार लिखित परीक्षा के माध्यम से भर्ती करवाने जा रही है। प्रदेश के लगभग तीन हजार जूनियर हाईस्कूलों में पांच हजार से ज्यादा शिक्षकों के पद खाली हैं।
किन पदों पर कितनी भर्तियां:
-सरकारी प्राइमरी स्कूलों में लगभग 51 हजार सहायक अध्यापक
-राजकीय इंटर कॉलेजों में लगभग 11 हजार एलटी ग्रेड
-राजकीय इंटर कॉलेजों में लगभग 1400 प्रवक्ता
-सहायताप्राप्त इंटर कॉलेजों में 15508 सहायक अध्यापक व प्रवक्ता
-माध्यमिक शिक्षा व एडेड स्कूलों में लगभग 5000 लिपिकों के पद
-एडेड जूनियर हाईस्कूलों में लगभग 5000 शिक्षकों के पद
21,695 सहायक अध्यापकों की अंतर्जनपदीय तबादला सूची जारी, 69 हजार ने किया था आवेदन
न्यूज डेस्क, अमर उजाला, लखनऊ Updated Thu, 31 Dec 2020 11:07 PM
बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद के सहायक अध्यापकों की बहुप्रतीक्षित अंतर्जनपदीय तबादला सूची बृहस्पतिवार रात जारी की गई। तबादला नीति में दिए गए नियमों की बाध्यता और उच्च न्यायालय की गाइडलाइन के कारण 68 हजार आवेदकों में से 21,695 सहायक अध्यापकों का ही तबादला हो सका है। तबादलों का इंतजार कर रहे 37 हज़ार से अधिक सहायक अध्यापकों के हाथ मायूसी लगी है। सहायक अध्यापकों की तबादला सूची जारी होने की खबर फैलने के साथ ही हजारों की संख्या में सहायक अध्यापकों ने साइट खोलना शुरू किया। कुछ देर बाद साइट जाम होने लगी। साइट नही खुलने से आवेदक परेशान भी हुए।
उच्च न्यायालय की ओर से पुरूष शिक्षक के लिए पांच साल और महिला शिक्षक के लिए दो साल सेवा के बाद ही अंतर्जनपदीय तबादला करने की मंजूरी दी गई। इससे करीब 9057 सहायक अध्यापक तबादले के दायरे से बाहर हो गए। बृहस्पतिवार रात एनआईसी ने परिषद की वेबसाइट पर 21,695 सहायक अध्यापको की अंतर्जनपदीय तबादला सूची जारी की। परिषद के सचिव प्रताप सिंह बघेल ने बताया कि तबादला नीति के तहत जिलों में रिक्त पदों की संख्या, एक जिले से दूसरे जिले में अधिकतम तबादले की सीमा और उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश के तहत निर्धारित गाइडलाइन के बाद 21, 695 सहायक अध्यापकों के तबादले किए गए हैं।
अब जिले के अंदर तबादले शुरू होंगे
बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद की ओर से अब जिले के अंदर एक ब्लॉक से दूसरे ब्लॉक और एक नगर निकाय क्षेत्र से दूसरे क्ष्रेत्र में सहायक अध्यापकों के तबादले की प्रक्रिया शुरू की जाएगी। बेसिक शिक्षा विभाग इस बार ग्रामीण से शहरी और शहरी से ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों में भी ट्रांफ़सर की छूट देने की तैयारी कर रहा है
बहुप्रतीक्षित अंतर्जनपदीय शिक्षक स्थानांतरण सूची कल 30 दिसम्बर को होगी जारी, नए नियम से हुए हज़ारों फॉर्म निरस्त
उत्तर प्रदेश के परिषदीय विद्यालयों में कार्यरत 54 हजार से अधिक सहायक अध्यापकों की बहुप्रतीक्षित अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण की सूची कल 30 दिसंबर को शाम तक जारी होगी। शिक्षक पैन व अकॉउंट नम्बर डाल कर अपने स्थानांतरण की स्थिति जान सकेंगे।
बेसिक शिक्षा विभाग स्थानांतरण के लिए इलाहाबाद उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश के तहत नए कार्यक्रम के अनुसार शिक्षकों को नए साल में गृहजनपद भेजने का तोहफ़ा देगी वही नए शासनादेश से हजारों शिक्षक फिर से अपने गृहजनपद जाने से वंचित हो जाएंगे।
सबसे पहले बात करें 68500 के अंतर्गत नियुक्त शिक्षकों की जो अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण हेतु प्रतीक्षा कर रहे थे।विश्वस्त स्रोत के मुताबिक 68500 में कार्यरत शिक्षकों का आवेदन निरस्त होने का कारण अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण की भविष्य में मांग न करने के लिए दिया गया वो शपथ पत्र है जो उन्होंने नियुक्ति के समय विभाग को दिया था जब कि कहीं कहीं जनपद में 68500 के आवेदन स्वीकार भी किये गए हैं।
वहीं सबसे अधिक परेशानी म्यूचुअल स्थानांतरण के लिए पुरुष शिक्षकों के लिए 5 वर्ष और महिला शिक्षिकाओं के लिए 2 वर्ष की सेवा अनिवार्य किए जाने के बाद पैदा हुई। नियमावली बदलने से अधिकांश शिक्षक म्यूचुअल ट्रांसफर के दावे से बाहर हो गए हाँलाकि इन शिक्षकों ने सरकार से स्थानांतरण का मौका दिए जाने की मांग की है।
म्यूचुअल स्थानांतरण में ऐसे दोनों शिक्षकों को नुकसान हुआ है जिनमें पहले ने पांच वर्ष और दूसरे ने तीन वर्ष की सेवा अवधि पूरी करने के बाद अपने जिले में स्थानांतरण के लिए आवेदन किया।पूरे साल भर इंतजार करने के बाद स्थानांतरण खुलने पर 5 वर्ष का नियम लागू हो गया, जिससे वे स्थानांतरण की प्रक्रिया से बाहर हो गए।
उधर बेसिक शिक्षा सचिव ने सत्र 2019-20 के लिए बेसिक शिक्षा अधिकारियों को भेजे निर्देश में कहा है कि वे यदि शिक्षकों का सेवाकाल पांच और शिक्षिकाओं का दो साल पूरा नहीं हुआ है तो उनके आवेदन अनिवार्य रूप से निरस्त कर दिए जाएं। इसी तरह यदि किसी शिक्षक या शिक्षिका ने एक से अधिक आवेदन किए हैं तो केवल एक पर ही विचार किया जाए साथ ही उन्होंने कहा 21 एवं 24 दिसंबर को जारी पत्र में अंतरजनपदीय तबादले को लेकर स्पष्ट दिशा-निर्देश दिए गए हैं, लेकिन इसके बावजूद अपेक्षित कार्यवाही नहीं की जा रही है। उन्होंने ऑनलाइन आवेदन पत्रों को परीक्षण के बाद सत्यापित/निरस्त करने की कार्यवाही समय से पूरा करने को कहा है जिससे 30 दिसम्बर को ससमय सूची जारी हो सके।
पैन नम्बर व बैंक अकाउंट नम्बर डाल कर जाने स्थानांतरण की स्थिति
परिषदीय विद्यालयों में कार्यरत 54000 से अधिक सहायक अध्यापकों की स्थानांतरण सूची कल से ऑनलाइन देखी जा सकेगी। मुख्यमंत्री योगी बुधवार को ऑनलाइन स्थानांतरण की शुरुआत करेंगे । वहीं आवेदक गुरुवार से upbasiceduparishad.gov.in पर पैन नम्बर व बैंक अकाउंट नम्बर डाल कर अपने स्थानांतरण की स्थिति जान सकेंगे
