Dr. Udai Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and Others

The present special has been filed against the judgment and order dated 14th February 2011 passed by the learned single Judge whereby the writ petition preferred by the opposite party No. 7 challenging the transfer of the present Appellant on the post of lecturer (where he was officiating as Principal being the senior most teacher) from Shyam Singh Inter College, Bilsuri District Bulandshahar (hereinafter referred to as the Bulandshahar College) to Adarsh Krishi Inter College, Sarol District Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as the Aligarh College) has been allowed with costs.

We have heard Sri G.K. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, learned standing counsel representing opposite parties No. 1 to 4, Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare on behalf of the opposite party No. 7 and Sri Shyam Sunder, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite parties No. 5 and 6 and have perused the impugned judgment and order dated 14.02.2011 passed by the learned single Judge giving rise to the present appeal, the grounds taken in the memo of appeal and the documents filed along with it.

Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows:

The Appellant was working as Officiating Principal being the senior most lecturer in the Bulandshahar College. Sri Chidda Lal Agrawal, the Officiating Principal of the Aligarh College was due to retire on 30th June 2008. The Appellant made an application seeking his transfer from the Bulandshahar College to the Aligarh College. The application was made on 28.01.2008. The Manager of Bulandshahar College issued a no objection certificate on 11.03.2008. The Manager also wrote a letter that the Committee of Management is fully agreeable to such a transfer. The Manager of the Aligarh College vide letter dated 29.02.2008 intimated the Managements'' no objection. The Joint Director of Education, Aligarh, vide order dated 23.04.2008 permitted the transfer whereupon the Appellant joined at Aligarh College as lecturer and was appointed as Officiating Principal on 01.07.2008. He is working since then in the said college. Sri Harsih Chand Srivastava, the senior most teacher of the Aligarh College, who has been arrayed as opposite party No. 7 in the present appeal approached this Court by means of a writ petition (giving rise to the present appeal) challenging the transfer of the Appellant on the ground that the procedure prescribed under Regulations 55 to 59 of Chapter III of Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations) framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has not been followed as there is no resolution passed by the Committee of Management permitting his transfer from the Bulandshahar College to the Aligarh College. The objection raised by the opposite party No. 7 has been upheld by the learned single Judge and the learned single Judge had allowed the writ petition, quashed the transfer of the Appellant from the Bulandshahar College to the Aligarh College. The learned single Judge had further held that the statutory provisions have to be strictly observed both in letters and spirit and if there is any violation or non-compliance, the order would be rendered ineffective and null and void.

Sri G.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Manger of the Bulandshahar College, took a somersault and even after earlier giving his no objection and stating that the Committee of Management has no objection, manipulated the records and stated that the Committee of Management had not passed any resolution. Sri Singh relied upon the various documents referred to hereinbefore to establish that in fact due procedure as prescribed under law has been followed in the present case and, therefore, the order passed by the learned single Judge is liable to be set-aside. He also invited the attention of the Court to the report submitted by the Associate District Inspector of Schools in which it has been stated that the handwriting of the Manager tallies with the documents filed along with the application and further the complete register was not produced.

Sri Khare, learned senior counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 7 and Sri Shyam Sundar, learned Counsel appearing for the Committee of Management have produced the original agenda register as also the minutes book to show that no such meeting has taken place on 08.03.2008 as alleged by the Appellant. The Court has perused the two registers and finds that in the agenda register, the 1st agenda is of 01.08.2007 and thereafter the next agenda is of 24.07.2008. Similar is the position with regard to the minutes register maintained by the Committee of Management of the Bulandshahr College. From a perusal of the said register, it does not appear that any paper has been torn from the said register in between the agendas of 01.08.2007 and 24.07.2008. It, therefore, establishes beyond doubt that the Committee of Management did not hold any meeting on 08.03.2008 to consider for grant of no objection to the transfer of the Appellant from its College to the Aligarh College. We may mention here that under Regulation 57 framed under the Act, it is enjoined upon the Manager to place the matter before the Management and after the assent has been given by the Committee, he will forward one copy of the application along with the service book and character roll of the teacher to the District Inspector of Schools in which the institution is situate.

In our considered opinion, the requirement of placing the matter before the Committee of Management under Regulation 57 is mandatory as the Manager can not act on its own in his individual capacity of being a Manager. Grant of no objection for transfer of one teacher from its college to another is a matter which should be decided by the Committee of Management and not by the Manager alone as the administration and welfare of the Institution is to be looked after by the Committee of Management collectively.

That being the position, we are of the considered opinion that in a case where the requirement of Regulation 57 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the Act, is not followed, in that event, no transfer can be effected.

Sri G.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the Appellant invited the attention of the Court to the affidavits filed by the President and other members of the Committee of Management in which they had categorically stated that a meeting of the Committee of Management was held on 8.8.2008 and a resolution was passed. However, this is of no consequence as the Court has perused the agenda register and the minutes register and finds that no such meeting has taken place. What induced some of the members and office bearers of the Committee of Management to give an affidavit supporting the Appellant''s case is not discernable from the record and, therefore, can not be relied upon. However, the fact remains that the issue has to be decided on the basis of the material on record and the Court should desist from importing personal knowledge or any alleged malpractice which is not supported by any material on record.

That being the position, we are of the considered opinion, that the order passed by the learned single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity.

However, we may mention here that the cost of Rs. 25,000/- imposed by the learned single Judge appears to be highly excessive as no reasons have been given as to why such a huge cost is to be imposed. It is, therefore, reduced to Rs. 2000/-.

The appeal fails and is dismissed.