Mass Transfer Of Teachers Mid-Academic Session 'Arbitrary', Disturbs Education Ecosystem: Rajasthan High Court

While staying transfer of a Government school principal, Rajasthan High Court held it to be arbitrary and damaging to the education as it was ordered in the middle of the academic session. Justice Ashok Kumar Jain said that such mass transfers in September not only disrupted classes and students' continuity but also reflected the lack of administrative sensitivity towards the school systems. While terming the transfer to be contrary to the principles of good governance, the bench held, “It is not expected that the Government may transfer teachers on a mass scale in the mid of an educational session, which is going to conclude within another six months. Such action not only impacts the future of students, but also affects the aspirations of parents who cannot afford private or public school education for their children. Probably, this is one of the reasons why top Government officials or persons having sufficient means, admit their children to private schools.”Furthermore, the Court slammed the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (“Tribunal”) for selective application of Supreme Court rulings to matters and granting different reliefs in similar cases, without looking at the merits of the case. The Court was hearing a petition by a Government School principal who was transferred 500 kms away from his current posting location, within a span of 5 months, and that too in the middle of an academic session. When the case was filed before the Tribunal, no relief was granted.It was the case of the petitioner that the Tribunal had adopted a discriminatory practices by granting stay in identical matters and making no reference to Supreme Court rulings that hold otherwise. While arguing it to be a case of judicial dishonesty, it was submitted that the Tribunal was in the habit of pick and choose while considering the cases on merits. After hearing the contentions, and highlighting that 4,527 Principals were part of the mass transfer in September, the Court observed that it was always expected that transfer of teachers should take place during summer vacations. However, in the present case, the mass transfer exercise was carried out in September 2025 which itself indicated that it was done at the cost of education system. The Court held that the mass transfer not only disturbed the entire educational ecosystem but was also sufficient to conclude that the education system was being governed by the whims and fancies of administrators, and not according to needs of the students. It was further observed that the National Education Policy 2020 (“NEP”) could be implemented only with collaborative efforts of State Governments, and the State administrators were under an obligation to implement the policy in its letters and spirit. “After a change in Government, a practice has been adopted in almost all States to effect mass transfers of employees on the ground of administrative exigencies and public interest. Normally, a government servant, particularly a teacher, suffers not on account of political affiliation, but due to change of Government or pressure of local politicians. A teacher is a person working at the grassroots level to impart education to children so as to make them future-ready.”Furthermore, on the dismissal of the stay application by the Tribunal based on some Supreme Court ruling, without considering the merits of the case, the Court termed it a “dishonest and mala fide approach adopted by the Tribunal” and held that it reflected arbitrariness and undue hardship. The Court held that it was expected from the Chairman and Members of the Tribunal to maintain impartial conduct, adherence to precedents, and avoidance of bias or deviation. “The Court cannot keep its eyes closed when the Service Tribunal, which is the primary forum meant for redressal of grievances of a government servant, while considering any case, makes a distinction between two cases having identical and similar facts.”In this light, the petition was partially allowed, wherein the transfer order was set aside by the Court. The Tribunal was directed to decide the appeal by the petitioner on merits within a period of two months. Furthermore, the administrative Department/Department of Personnel was also expected to impart proper training to the Chairman and Members of Tribunal to avoid any such situation in the future. Title: Hargovind Meena v Secretary, School Education Department, Rajasthan & Ors. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 11Click Here To Read/Download Order

Mass Transfer Of Teachers Mid-Academic Session 'Arbitrary', Disturbs Education Ecosystem: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Aggarwal

Tags