- (1.) BY these writ petitions, the petitioners working as teachers in Govt. Schools have challenged the order of transfers/absorption from one place to another within the same Panchayat Samiti under the Equalization Policy.
(2.) LEARNED counsels inter alia have raised the issue of jurisdiction of learned Deputy Secretary, Panchayati Raj (Elementary Education) Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur in passing the said order on the anvil of Section 89 (8) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which provides that transfer of any member of service which includes primary and upper primary school teachers shall be made after consultation with Pradhans or the Pramukhs , as the case may be, of the Panchayat Samitis or the Zila Parishads. However, sub-section (8-A) of Section 89, which is a non obstante clause, provides that the State Government may transfer any member of the service from one Panchayat Samiti to another Panchayat Samiti, whether within the same district or outside it, from one Zila Parishad to another Zila Parishad, or from a Panchayat Samiti to a Zila Parishad or vice-a-versa. Learned counsels for the petitioners submitted that the said jurisdiction of State Government under Section 89(8-A) can be invoked only if the transfer is made from one Panchayat Samiti to another Panchayat Samiti & not when the transfer is made within the same Panchayat Samiti or intra same Panchayat Samiti from one school to another school but impugned orders have been passed by the said authority Deputy Secretary in the instant cases. They have also relied upon the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. - 2008 (2) RLW 1950 in which it was held in favour of the petitioners that such power does not vest in the State Government under Section 89 (8-A) but vests in the Chief Executive Officer of the Zila Parishad as per Rule 336 (26) of the Rules of 1996. Copy of the said decision is placed on record. Learned Addl. Advocate General Mr. R.L.Jangid, who is present in the Court, is directed to accept notice. He may be supplied two sets of writ petition during the course of the day. He will file reply to the writ petitions within three days, as prayed by him. Learned Addl. Advocate General also submitted that against the decision of learned Single Judge in the case of Ram Singh (supra) an appeal has been preferred by the State Government, which is pending before the Division Bench of this Court. Be that as it may, in the opinion of this Court, this limited question of jurisdiction of Deputy Secretary of the Panchayati Raj Department in passing the impugned transfer/absorption orders only requires consideration by this Court.
(3.) REPLY to the writ petition may be filed before the next date i.e. 13/7/2010. Rejoinder, if any, may also be filed before the next date. In the meanwhile, till the next date only status quo with regard to transfers of petitioners shall be maintained by the respondents. It will not mean that any status quo ante has been restored. The petitioners/teachers already relieved from the present place of posting and who have joined at the transferred place shall be allowed to work there & shall not be required to join at the earlier place of posting in pursuance of this order. However, those who have not been relieved may not be relieved till next date & may be allowed to work at the earlier place of posting vide the impugned order. Put up on 13/7/2010. ;