Aashish Kalra vs State Of Punjab & Ors.

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (Oral)

At the outset, learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that since the petitioners, in essence, are aggrieved by the transfer orders or, in some cases, non-issuance thereof, in pursuance of the Teachers Transfer Policy, 2019, all these writ petitions are amenable to be decided together. Accordingly, all the above captioned petitions are taken up together for disposal.

This Court comes across aa number of petitions laying challenge to the transfer orders; the instances of either relieving or not relieving, despite transfer orders having been passed; and also the cases where the vacant posts are not shown on the official website, thereby depriving meritorious Teachers from exercising option with regard to transfer.

Learned counsel for the petitioners jointly point out various lacunae in the Policy in question. They submit that the Policy does not postulate any guidelines for relieving of the Teachers, in pursuance of the transfer orders having been passed in their favour. Citing an example from one of the petitions, it is submitted that two Teachers, posted in the same School, were transferred, pursuant to the annual transfer drive. While the male Teacher was relieved by the Principal concerned, citing the reason of couple case, but the female Teacher has still not been relieved. Apparently, the Principal has arbitrarily exercised his/her discretion in the process of relieving, owing to absence of any specific instructions/guidelines in the Policy, in this regard. Not only that, even the marks secured by the Teachers, in the annual transfer drive, were never uploaded on the website before ppassing transfer order, thereby, rendering the entire process opaque. It is further highlighted that no mechanism is in place to raise grievance with respect to incorrect awarding of marks.

It is further asserted that the Policy is conspicuously silent with regard to identification of the vacant posts. In some of the matters, it has come to light that posts, which are lying vacant, were not reflected on the official website of the department, thereby barring the meritorious Teachers from applying therefor, but the same were made available to certain selected Teachers, for the undisclosed reasons. Thus, the Policy fails in ensuring impartiality, as well. While projecting another blatant example, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that a Teacher has been transferred to a station which was never disclosed in the annual transfer drive. Furthermore, some of the Teachers have approached this Court with a grievance that, after their promotion, they were given a limited choice of vacant post, only with a view to facilitate less meritorious Teachers in opting for stationss of their choice. So much so, a serious question as regards transparency in the Policy has also been raised. Apart from the above, several other issues have also been raised before this Court, which are not required to be recorded, at this stage.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, and upon a thorough scrutiny of the petitions, this Court has no hesitation to take a strong reservation that the Policy in question not only suffers from incurable defects but is also fraught with loopholes, which empower the Administration with unchecked discretion to transfer the employees. Such unfettered discretion, which results in arbitrariness, has constrained a large number of employees to approach the Court by filing these petitions for redressal of grievance founded on the same grounds.

This Court, on 10.08.2026, had passed the hereinafter extracted order:-

In deference thereto, Ms. Sonali Giri, Secretary, Department of School Education, Punjab, is present in Court.

During the course of hearing, which has encompassed manifold dimensions of the grievances, the Secretary, Department of School Education, fairly admits that the Policy in question, indeed, warrants comprehensive re-examination. Further, she fairly submits that, in fact, the Policy ought to be devised toto address all such issues, which may possibly invite the attention of the State Government.

In the wake of the abovesaid conceded position, and having regard to the far-reaching consequences, which a large number of employees across the State may face, this Court, at this stage, deems it appropriate to refrain from adjudicating the matter on merits, enabling the authorities concerned to set right the anomalies, at the first instance. Accordingly, on the basis of the fair stand set out on behalf of the respondent-State, as narrated above, the present petitions are disposed of, with the following directions:-

However, in the event of default in compliance of the hereinabove directions within the stipulated period, the petitioners are at liberty to move an apt application/motion(s) for revival of the instant petition(s).

A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases.