N. K. Mehrotra, J. - (1.) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the transfer order dated 2.12.2003, by which he has been transferred from Primary School Saroth Puwayan Block Jaithara to Primary School Babhsuwa, Block Patiyali, in the district of Lucknow.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he being headmaster of the Primary School had made a complaint to the District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Etah for the poor construction of the school building which was constructed by a man of village Pradhan. On being annoyed by this complaint the village Pradhan pressurised the Director through a Local M.L.A. for his transfer. THE second ground to challenge the transfer order is that he cannot be transferred from one block to another block without his consent as provided under Chapter 3 of U. P. Education Karmchari Rules, 1973 and the prescribed procedure has not been followed because his transfer has not been recommended by the Block level committee. It is alleged that in his case transfer has been passed on the order of Director Basic Education which shows that this transfer order has been issued on the pressure of local M.L.A. Another ground to challenge the transfer order is that the petitioner would complete 60 years of age on 20.7.2004 and he has a short period in his superannuation. THErefore, he should be permitted to be continued on his present post up to the date of retirement. He has referred certain guidelines as contained in Government order No. 3096-3075/2002-3, dated 15.5.2002 which relates to adjustment policy of the teachers of Basic Education. In this Government order it is directed that the teachers who have already completed 55 years of age should not be transferred from one place to another in order to make adjustment of teachers. It is well settled that this Court can interfere the order of transfer under Article 226 of the Constitution on very limited grounds namely : that the transfer order has been passed contrary to the statutory provision or has been passed by a person who has no authority to do so or is mala fide - see Silpi Bose v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 532 and Union of India v. S. L. Abbas, AIR 1993 SC 2444. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, no such ground has been made out which may warrant interference by this Court. In my opinion the proper remedy for the petitioner is to make a representation to the Director of Education (Basic) setting forth the ground that he has already completed 59 years of age and he has a short tenure in his superannuation and, therefore, he should not be transferred till the date of his superannuation, which is a ground available to the petitioner for his stay in accordance with the Government policy and which must be considered by the Director of Education (Basic) at the time of disposal of the representation of the petitioner. It is accordingly directed that if the petitioner makes a representation to the Director, Basic Education within one month from today, the same shall be decided expeditiously preferable within a period of one month from the date the filing of a certified copy of this order along with the representation before him and till then petitioner shall continue on the present post and will also continue to get the salary of the post held by him. Subject to the observations made above, the writ petition is disposed of.;