'Teachers Must Maintain Safe Distance From Politics': Orissa HC Quashes Govt Order Empowering MPs/MLAs To Recommend Teachers' Transfer
The Orissa High Court has set aside a State Government order empowering Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of State Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to recommend inter-district and intra-district transfer of teachers bereft of any statutory scheme to that effect.A Bench of Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad stressed that unnecessary nexus between politicians and teachers can have a devastating...
The Orissa High Court has set aside a State Government order empowering Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of State Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to recommend inter-district and intra-district transfer of teachers bereft of any statutory scheme to that effect.
A Bench of Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad stressed that unnecessary nexus between politicians and teachers can have a devastating effect on the society. In its words –
“Impugned letter of the kind, which provides for MPs/MLAs recommending transfer of teachers, has the potential of creating a seamless nexus between the political parties/ candidates and the community of teachers. This would not augur well to the system. One needs no research to visualize the fruits of poisonous tree that would grow on the soil of such nexus. It is teachers, more particularly those who teach up to the level of HSC/X Standard, who mould the younger generation as citizenry in the making. As of necessity, teachers have to maintain safe distance from political parties & elected representatives.”
A set of guidelines dated 14.05.2025 was issued by the State Government in exercise of power under Section 19 and 25 read with the Schedule to the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ('the RTE Act'). The said guidelines constituted a 'Transfer Committee' for effectuating transfers of teachers across the State.
Surprisingly, one day prior to the issuance of the aforesaid guidelines, the government issued a letter on 13.05.2025 empowering the MPs and MLAs to recommend transfer of teachers, which shall be subject to certain rules. Being aggrieved by such extra-statutory conferment of power on legislators, certain teachers challenged the same through a batch of writ petitions.
During the course of hearing, the Bench specifically queried as to in exercise of which statutory provision the said letter was issued. The State Counsel, however, was unable to point out any provision as such. Further, nothing was stated in the said letter indicating its lawful issuance or binding nature.
Justice Shripad referred to Section 159 of the Representation of People Act and Section 27 of the RTE Act which specifically bar engagement of teachers in any non-academic work except for census, election duties or disaster relief. Anticipating the probable unholy nexus between the teachers and the politicians through such election works, the Court opined that teachers must maintain a “safe distance” from politicians.
Though the State attempted to defend such power of the law-makers by contending that such recommendations are not binding, the Court promptly spurned such argument by observing –
“In several impugned orders, the decision is stated to have been taken by the Committee only on the recommendation of MPs/MLAs. These decisions do not mention about the parameters discernable [sic] from the transfer Guidelines. It hardly needs to be stated about the enormity of influence such recommendations of MPs/MLAs would cast on the officials, who happen to be the members of Transfer Committee. Cases are replete wherein recommendations of the kind are virtually treated as commands.”
Therefore, the Court was of the firm view that the impugned letter cannot be said to have been passed by the mandate of law. Accordingly, it quashed the letter dated 13.05.2025 which conferred recommending power on MPs and MLAs. As a corollary, the transfer orders purportedly issued by virtue of such recommendations were also set aside.
Nevertheless, the Bench found merit in the request of the State to reinstate the transferred teachers in their original place of posting only after the expiry of the current academic year, so that the interests of students are not hampered.
“However, such of the petitioners should be restored to their original places wherein they were working before the issuance of impugned orders, within one week following the expiry of academic year 2025-26. Any delay in this regard would be viewed very seriously in the next level of the legal battle,” the Court warned.
Case Title: Ranjan Kumar Tripathy & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) No. 20875 of 2025
Date of Judgment: November 27, 2025
Counsel for the Petitioners: M/s. Kunal Ku. Swain, K. Swain, J.R. Khuntia, Sukanta Ku. Dalai, P. Swain, S. Mahapatra, B. Bhuyan, J. Bhuyan, S.K. Panda, Durgesh Narayan Rath, A.K. Saa, S. Das, Ramdas Achary, S. Das, S. Srichandan, P. Agarwal, Biswabihari Mohanty, Mohit Ku. Pati, M. Pati, S. Kar, S.S. Pati, (Dr.) Purusottam Chuli, P. Nath, P. Punyatoya, Sameer Ku. Das, P.K. Behera, N. Jena, Agasti Kanungo, C. Nayak, N.K. Mishra & S. Sukla, Advocates
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Saroj Ku. Jee, Addl. Govt. Advocate, M/s. R.R. Ray, N.K. Sen, P.K. Samal, S.R. Mishra, K.K. Rout, S.K. Rout, S.K. Baral, P.N. Pattnaik, T.S. Swaraj, S. Sthitaprajna, S. Sahoo & S.K. Bhuyan, Advocates
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 159