Naziya Isak Kazi v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
by SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE Date: 2025.09.26 15:24:20 +0530 SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(3) WRIT PETITION NO. 11788 OF 2025 Maharashtra Rajya Shikshak Parishad Prathamik Vibhag
...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(4) WRIT PETITION NO. 12140 OF 2025 Maharashtra State Teacher Council Primary Department
...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(64) WRIT PETITION NO. 12183 OF 2025 Shantaram Suryakant Jagtap & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
WITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 31249 OF 2025 Manisha Gorakh Taware & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
WITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 31313 OF 2025 Dattatray Khandu Navadkar & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(65) WRIT PETITION NO. 12331 OF 2025 Ashwini Ravindra Shitole & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(66) WRIT PETITION NO. 12332 OF 2025 Devanand Vitthalrao Jamdade & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(67) WRIT PETITION NO. 12333 OF 2025 Sunil Vitthal Phand & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(68) WRIT PETITION NO. 12334 OF 2025 Dadaso Shankar Jagtap & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(174) WRIT PETITION NO. 11437 OF 2025 Mahesh Ramchandra Pimpale & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(175) WRIT PETITION NO. 11439 OF 2025 Ravindra Hareshwar Gharat & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
**** Mr. Suresh Pakale, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Nilesh Desai i/by Ms. Padmaja Malgaonkar, Advocate for the Petitioners in WP/12183/25, WP(ST)/31249/25, WP(ST)/31313/25, WP/12331/25, WP/12332/25 WP/12333/2025 & WP/12334/2025.
Mr. Rakesh Bhatkar, Advocate for the Petitioners in WP/11437/2025 & WP/11439/2025.
Mr. Ashwin Kapadnis, Advocate for the Respondent/ZP Nashik in WP/11788/2025 & WP/12140/2025 and the Respondent/ZP Pune in WP/12183/2025, WP(ST)/31249/2025, WP(ST)/31313/2025, WP/12331/25, WP/12332/25 WP/12333/2025 & WP/12334/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Mr. Aditya Deolekar, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/11788/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Ms. P.N. Diwan, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/12140/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Mr. S.H. Kankal, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/12183/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Mr. A.K. Naik, AGP for Respondent/State in WP(ST)/31249/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Mr. A.C. Bhadang, AGP for Respondent/State in WP(ST)/31313/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Ms. N.M. Mehra, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/12331/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Ms. Devyani S. Deshmukh, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/12332/2025.
Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Mr. V.G. Badgujar, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/12333/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Ms. Priyanka Chavan, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/12334/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Ms. R.A. Salunkhe, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/11437/2025. Ms. Neha Bhide, G.P. a/w Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P., Mr. Karan Thorat, 'B' Panel Counsel for Respondent/State in WP/11434/2025. **** CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2025 P.C. :- 1.
In all these matters, these Petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by their proposed transfers for multiple reasons. Some similarly situated Petitioners have approached the Nagpur Bench, Aurangabad Bench and the Kolhapur Bench. At the Benches, the learned Courts have prima facie viewed these transfers to be mid-term transfers. Consequentially, such transfers as were challenged by the Petitioners, have been stayed by the Benches. These orders have been cited before this Court.
2.
The learned Government Pleader along with the learned Advocates representing the Zilla Parishads, submit that this transfer process is a long drawn exercise. Data of lakhs of teachers are collated by the various Zilla Parishads and the said data is fed to the TEACHER TRANSFER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ('TTMS'), which is a system operating for the Government of Maharashtra, Rural Development Department. This system considers various categories of employees, who are liable to be transferred. We need not go into the various categories, which are too many to be quoted here. Suffice it to say that the TTMS deals with such transfers category-wise.
3.
The learned Government Pleader and the learned Advocates for the Zilla Parishads further submit that this entire system of Annual General Transfers ('AGT') operates like a chain. Those liable to be transferred move out of their seats and proceed to those places, where they have been posted. At each place, a vacancy is created by the outgoing teacher. It does not so happen that two teachers accidentally occupy a single vacant seat. Therefore, their grievance that the orders of staying the transfers, brings the entire wheel, which is moving in coordination, to a grinding halt.
4.
For example, if some transfers are stayed, those candidates continue to sit in their positions and other candidates, who have been transferred to occupy the said vacancies created by the transfers, get locked as there is no seat to occupy. It is difficult to turn around and send back the candidate owing to the stay obtained by a Petitioner. We are further informed that transfers in 18 Districts have been effected and teachers have already joined the places of transfer.
5.
The reason for the delay in effecting transfers in September-2025 is said to be on account of a cascading effect, which took place because of the code of conduct having been introduced in April-May, 2024 due to the Lok-Sabha Election. The Annual Transfers got staggered beyond the code of conduct period for the year 2024. This had its effect on the AGT for the year 20252026. Hence, the AGT occurred in September-2025. On account of the orders of stay granted by the respective Benches, a sort of difficult and unmanageable situation is created. The learned Government Pleader hastens to add that the State is not criticizing any interim order passed by the Court, but is only making a humble attempt to convey to the Court that staying of the transfers has
broken the cycle of the transfers and the AGT of 2025-2026 is now in disarray.
6.
The Government Resolution dated 18th June, 2024 is pointed out to us, more specifically the clauses pertaining to how a transfer should be effect and in what category, as well as, how the grievance of a transferee can be considered.
7.
The learned Government Pleader points out Clause Nos.5.10.1, 5.10.2, 5.10.3 and 5.10.4, of the GR which read as under :- "५.१० बदल्यांबाबतच्या अनियनिततेबाबतची तक्रार : ५.१०.१ संगणकीय प्रणालीद्वारे निग नित झालेल्या आदेशाच्या नि$रोधात बदलीच्या अनियनिततेबाबत तक्रार असल्यास त्याचा निपटारा ुख्य काय कारी अधिधकारी यांच्या स्तरा$र झाल्यास संबंधिधत शिशक्षकांा जि1ल्हा परिरषद स्तरा$रच सत्$र न्याय निळू शकतो. यासाठी जि1ल्हांतग त बदलीध्ये शिशक्षकांची तक्रार असल्यास सदरच्या तक्रारींची चौकशी करु नि$ारण करण्यासाठी ुख्य काय कारी अधिधकारी यांच्या स्तरा$र एक सनिती गठीत करण्यात येत आहे. सदर सनितीध्ये ुख्य काय कारी अधिधकारी, जि1ल्हा परिरषद, उपुख्य काय कारी अधिधकारी (साान्य प्रशास नि$भाग), शिशक्षणाधिधकारी (प्राथनिक) यांचा सा$ेश असेल. बदलीचे आदेश प्राप्त झाल्यापासू संबंधिधत शिशक्षकांी सात निद$साच्या आत बदलीबाबत तक्रार असल्यास या सनितीकडे तक्रार अ1 दाखल करा$ा. तक्रारीच्या
संबंधात सनितीे चौकशी करु ३० निद$साचे आत निण य घेण्यात या$ा. परंतु बदलीबाबतची तक्रार तपासत असताा गैरसोयीची नियुक्ती म्हण1े बदल्यांधील अनियनितता व्हे, असे प्राुख्याे स्पष्ट करण्यात येत आहे.
कोणत्याही परिरस्थिस्थतीत घोनिषत करण्यात आलेल्या अनि$ाय रिरक्त 1ागे$र शिशक्षकांची सुपदेशाे नियुक्ती करता येणार ाही. कारण साीकरणाचे धोरण हे नि$द्यार्थ्यांयाRच्या शैक्षशिणक हक्कासाठी आ$श्यक आहे. ५.१०.२ ुख्य काय कारी अधिधकारी यांचे अध्यक्षतेखाली सनितीे घेतलेल्या निण याे साधा झाल्यास संबंधिधत शिशक्षक बदलीच्या अनियनितेबाबत नि$भागीय आयुक्तांकडे ुख्य काय कारी अधिधकारी यांचे आदेश प्राप्त झाल्यापासू ७ निद$साचे आत दाद ागू शकतात. अशा पध्दतीे नि$भागीय आयुक्त यांच्याकडे दाखल झालेल्या अपील$1ा तक्रारी$र शक्यतो तक्रार प्राप्त झाल्यांतर पुढील ३० निद$सांचे आत नि$भागीय आयुक्तांी निण य घ्या$याचा आहे. नि$भागीय आयुक्तांी घेतलेला निण य अंधित राहील.
५.१०.३ $रीलप्राणे बदलीच्या आदेशाच्या नि$रुध्द अनिपलीय प्रनिक्रया सुरु असताा 1र शैक्षशिणक $ष आरंभ झाले तर नि$द्यार्थ्यांयाRचे शैक्षशिणक ुकसा होऊ ये म्हणू अनिपलीय प्रनिक्रयेला बाधा येता $ शिशक्षकांचे अनिपलीय अधिधकार अबाधीत ठे$ू शिशक्षकांा त्यांा ेू निदलेल्या पदस्थापे$र ह1र होऊ शैक्षशिणक कत व्ये ब1ा$णे बंधकारक राहील.
५.१०.४ नि$शेष सं$ग भाग-१ $ नि$शेष सं$ग भाग-२ ध्ये ज्या शिशक्षकांी अ1 भरु बदली करु घेतलेली आहे $ त्या शिशक्षकांबद्दल तक्रारी प्राप्त झालेल्या आहेत, अशा शिशक्षकांची बदलीच्या संबंधिधत सं$गा च्या कागदपत्रांची तात्काळ पडताळणी करण्यात या$ी. ही पडताळणी करताा ैसर्गिगक न्याय म्हणू त्यांा म्हणणे ांडण्यासाठी सात निद$सांचा अ$धी देण्यात या$ा."
8.
The Petitioners are already protected under the ex parte ad-interim orders of this Court, as well as, of the various Benches. All of them are agreeable to move their individual applications to the Chief Executive Officer ('CEO') of the respective Zilla Parishad, within a period of seven days from today, in the light of Clause No. 5.10.1, reproduced above. Once such a representation is made, the CEO can consider the records and take a decision in each case within a period of 30 days. We do not expect the CEO to write lengthy orders, but a concise order indicating the reasons for either allowing an application or for rejecting it, should be in place. The analysis made on the basis of the material should be seen from such a concise order. If any teacher is aggrieved, he can avail of a remedy under Clause No.5.10.2.
9.
In view of the above, all these Writ Petitions are disposed off with the following directions :- a] The aggrieved Petitioner would follow the procedure in Clause No.5.10.1 and make an application to the CEO of the respective Zilla Parishads, within a period of seven working days from today.
b] The concerned CEO would verify from the data available and write a concise order if the application has to be rejected.
c] Any teacher aggrieved by the order of the CEO would be at liberty to strictly follow Clause No.5.10.2. The further process shall be governed by the clauses reproduced above below Clause No.5.10.
` d] Until the CEO decides the representation, the order passed earlier that the Petitioner should not be relieved, would continue to protect such Petitioner, till the decision of the CEO.
10.
Considering the peculiar situation that emerges from such Petitions, we would expect the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, since he is said to be the person who is monitoring all the Zilla Parishad teaching and non-teaching employees, to apply his mind to the present situation and issue appropriate directions to ensure that in future such a situation would not occur from the academic year 2026-2027. He would also issue appropriate directives in the light of his similar directives issued
earlier on 7th November, 2024, through the Rural Development Department addressed to all the CEOs of the Zilla Parishads, under the signature of Mr. Nitin S. Pawar, the then Desk Officer, Government of Maharashtra.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)