Thousands of junior teachers of primary schools in Uttar Pradesh have got a big relief from the High Court. The Lucknow bench of the High Court canceled the transfer policy of the government.

Giving relief to thousands of junior teachers of primary schools in Uttar Pradesh, the Allahabad High Court on Thursday quashed the government's transfer policy brought in June this year to maintain the teacher-student ratio. The Lucknow bench of the High Court quashed the relevant provisions of the government order issued on June 26, 2024, terming it "arbitrary and discriminatory".

A bench of Justice Manish Mathur gave this verdict while accepting 21 writ petitions filed separately by junior teachers including Pushkar Singh Chandel. The petitioners argued that under this policy only junior teachers are transferred, while senior or old teachers remain in their schools.

What did the petitioners argue while challenging it?

The petitioners had challenged clauses 3, 7, 8, and 9 of the government order of June 26 and the subsequent circular of the Basic Education Department of June 28, arguing that the said provisions are contrary to the fundamental right to equality as well as the Right to Education Act.

Senior advocates HGS Parihar, UN Mishra, and Sudeep Seth, appearing for various petitioners, jointly argued that in compliance with the above provisions, only that teacher is transferred to maintain the teacher-student ratio, who is later appointed in the primary school.

It was said that after the transfer, when such a teacher is appointed in a new primary school, then there also, due to his service period being the shortest, if there is a need to transfer a teacher again to maintain the teacher-student ratio, then the newly appointed teacher is transferred. It was also argued that the said policy is against the service rules of teachers.

What did the state government say?

At the same time, the state government opposed the petitions and said that the petitioners have no right to challenge the transfer policy. The government also said that this transfer policy is necessary to maintain the teacher-student ratio under the Right to Education Act.

What did the court say?

Delivering its verdict, the court said that in the government order of June 26, 2024, and the circular of June 28, 2024, no proper reason has been given to justify making the service period the basis of the said transfer policy. The court said that if this policy continues, every time the junior teacher will be adjusted through transfer and the senior will always remain where he is. The court further said that in the above circumstances it has been found that the said transfer policy is discriminatory and not in accordance with Article 14 of the Constitution.