✦ Madhya Pradesh High Court

Govind Prashad Tripathi v. State of M.P. Writ Petition No. 14803 / 2012 & Ors.

Writ Petition No. 14803 / 2012RAJENDRA MENON

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

Shri V.D.S.Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Bisen, learned Government Advocate, for the respondents/State. Petitioner is working as an Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School Baruka, Block Sohagpur, District- Shahdol. By the impugned order dated 13-07-2012 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, District-Shahdol, petitioner has been transferred from Govt. Primary School Baruka to Govt. Primary School Chhatwayi. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that under the Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009, there should be at least one teacher for every thirty five children. It is pointed out that if the petitioner is transferred the students-teacher ratio would be disturbed and the statutory provision of Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009 would be violated and, therefore, the transfer is illegal. The question as to how the students-teacher ratio should be maintained, reduction of number of teachers and breach of statutory rule is a matter to be considered by the Competent Authority and on the aforesaid grounds, interference into the administrative order of transfer is not warranted. It is for the Respondent No.3 2 to look into the matter on the grounds raised and take action. Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is directed that on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order along with a detailed representation, if not already done, Respondent No.3 shall decide the claim of the petitioner after adverting to the grounds raised by the petitioner and till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, petitioner shall be permitted to work at his present place of posting. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madhya Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 14803 / 2012). ← Search more judgments