HYDERABAD: In a significant development, a division bench of the High Court on Monday declared Rule 4 of Telangana Teachers Transfer Rules 2018 as unconstitutional. Rule 4, which prescribes the district education officers of erstwhile 10 districts of TS as the competent authority to effect transfer of teachers of local body schools, was ultra vires of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution since that post was no longer in existence consequent on 31 DEOs being appointed to the newly-formed 31 districts. Therefore, Rule 4, notified in GO No.16 dated June 6, 2018, was unconstitutional, it held.
The bench of acting chief justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice J Uma Devi gave this ruling on batch petitions which challenged the validity of Telangana Teachers (Regulation of Teachers) Rules, 2018. The petitioners were aggrieved by the action of the State in effecting transfers and in prescribing the Rules for effecting transfers of headmasters, teachers and so on in government schools and schools under the management of local authorities throughout the state.
Pronouncing the order on Monday, the bench disposed of the petitions, saying there was no merit in submissions put forth on behalf of petitioners. The bench, in its order, recorded the submission of the additional advocate-general that, in the place of the erstwhile DEOs, the regional joint director of school education would be asked to issue transfer and posting orders duly effecting transfers on basis of erstwhile district as a unit, and management-wise.
As for web counselling process, the bench directed the government to provide necessary guidance to the teachers concerned who were unfamiliar with the process to enable them to exercise their option through the process. With regard to the petitioners’ contention that in the Rules the authorities were giving only 10 points for the spouse category instead of giving first priority, which was nothing but class discrimination, the bench made it clear that the courts would not interfere in it.
As for other contention that it was the practice in vogue for the last several years that promotions were made before effecting transfers, the bench pointed out that no Rule, either under Article 309 or under any Statute, has been brought to its notice which obligates the state government to always make promotions before effecting transfers.
