‘No right to posting of choice’: Delhi High Court rejects KV teacher’s plea against transfer despite ‘bipolar diagnosis’

‘No record of mental disability’

• The mere fact that the petitioner was not accommodated at one of her preferred stations does not, by itself, render the transfer illegal or arbitrary.
• The medical condition of the petitioner was taken into account, and it was found that her case does not fall within the medical disability ground category as defined under the applicable transfer policy concerned.
• The petitioner is undergoing treatment for bipolar affective disorder and requires continued medical follow-up and family support.
• However, there is no certification on record to establish that the petitioner suffers from mental disability to the extent contemplated under the said policy.
• Judicial review in such matters is confined to examining whether the transfer is vitiated by mala fides, statutory violation, or patent arbitrariness.
• It was found that the petitioner has been serving at the Delhi station for a considerable period and is a part of a cadre having all-India transfer liability.
• In such circumstances, the decision of the Sangathan to effect her transfer due to administrative requirements cannot be said to be unreasonable or unjustified.
• The tribunal’s order does not suffer from any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error, and hence the present petition is dismissed.

Appointment, transfer, ‘mental health issue’

• The petitioner was appointed as a primary teacher (PRT) with the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan in February 2009 and has been serving in the said capacity since then.
• In the year 2022, while she was posted at Kendriya Vidyalaya in Delhi, she was transferred to Kendriya Vidyalaya of Pondicherry by an order in September, as part of an exercise of rationalisation and redistribution of teaching staff across Kendriya Vidyalayas.
• Aggrieved by the said transfer, she, along with other similarly situated employees, approached the tribunal, which was disposed of in September 2022.
• The matter travelled up to the Supreme Court, wherein, by a March 24 order, the Sangathan was permitted to undertake a fresh exercise by inviting options from the affected teachers for their posting.
• Consequently, the petitioner submitted her three preferred stations, namely Faridabad, Ghaziabad and Noida.
• However, she was transferred to Kendriya Vidyalaya of the Agra region by a June 2024 order.
• Aggrieved by her transfer, she submitted a representation seeking modification of her transfer because she is suffering from bipolar affective disorder and requires continued medical treatment and family support.
• The tribunal lastly found that the case of the petitioner does not fall within the medical disability ground category under the transfer policy concerned and that no interference with the administrative decision of transfer was warranted.

‘Suffering from bipolar affective disorder’

• Appearing for the petitioner, advocate R V Sinha argued that the tribunal has mechanically affirmed the action of the Sangathan without due consideration of the peculiar facts of the case.
• It was contended that the petitioner is suffering from bipolar affective disorder and has been under continuous psychiatric treatment since 2014.
• It was submitted that her medical condition necessitates sustained treatment, regular follow-up and, importantly, the availability of family support.
• It was further submitted that, in view of her medical condition, the case of the petitioner squarely falls within the ambit of the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
• He added that the Sangathan, being instrumentalities of the state, were under a statutory as well as constitutional obligation to provide reasonable accommodation to the petitioner.
• It was argued that the denial of such accommodation renders the impugned action arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 (equality before law), 16 (equality of opportunity) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India.
• The Sangathan has acted in a discriminatory manner since, in several similarly situated cases, requests for modification of transfer have been considered favourably.
• It was submitted that the action of the authority in allotting a station outside her preferred choices, without adequately considering her medical and personal circumstances, is arbitrary and unreasonable.

‘All-India transfer liability’

• Appearing for the Sangathan, advocate S Rajappa submitted that the transfer of the petitioner has been effected strictly in accordance with the policy governing transfers and complying with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the 2022 order.
• The entire exercise was undertaken in a structured and transparent manner, wherein all affected employees, including the petitioner, were allowed to indicate their preferred stations.
• Owing to administrative constraints, including the non-availability of vacancies at the stations of her choice, she could not be accommodated at her choice of stations.
• The petitioner does not fall within the medical disability ground category as defined under the transfer policy concerned, which specifically contemplates certain enumerated conditions, including “any other disease with more than 50% mental disability”.
• The medical certificate relied upon by the petitioner merely indicates that she is undergoing treatment for bipolar affective disorder and requires follow-up and family support, but does not certify that she suffers from a mental disability of the requisite threshold.
• The petitioner is a member of a service having all-India transfer liability and has remained posted at Delhi for a considerable period.