Smt Jyoti vs DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY on 30 September 2026

ORDER

PER: RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

Brief of the case as submitted by learned counsel for the applicant are that, applicant is a TGT (Hindi) joined Digitally signed by NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

under special recruitment drive conducted for NER and was posted at KV, lmphal No. 1 (Lamphelpat), Manipur. She is aggrieved as the respondents have published Marked Surplus Employee list (Tinsukia) in April, 2026 wherein the applicant has been declared as surplus and vide Transfer Order dated 31.08.2026, she has been transferred from KV No. 1, Lamphelpat to KV No. 1, AFS, Jorhat. Aggrieved with that, she had filed O.A No. 269/2026 whereby this Tribunal vide order dated 07.09.2026 disposed of the said O.A with direction upon the respondents to consider her case. In compliance to that, respondents have passed a speaking order on 24.09.2026, rejecting the case of the applicant, which is under challenged in this O.A.

2. According to applicant, the transfer order has been issued in the mid academic session of the daughter of the applicant who is studying in class X at KV No. 1, Lamphelpat, who will be appearing her Board Examination in 2027. He places reliance of the judgement rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Director of School Education Vs O. Kuruppa Thevan [1994 Supp (2) SCC 666]. He also relies

SINGSIT

on Para 2(I)(A) of Part 1-A of the transfer policy, 2023 and further submits that the respondents are acting in violation of their own policy in regard to spouse posting in the same station as provided under Para 3(x) of the transfer policy, 2023 dated 30.06.2023 and DOPT OM dated 30.09.2009 and 24.1 1.2022.

3. The applicant has brought our notice on the earlier order of this Tribunal and submits that the respondents while passing the Speaking Order dated 24.09.2026 have not taken into account the direction issued by this Tribunal in the O.A No. 269/2026. Applicant contends that after preferring the instant O.A challenging the speaking order dated 24.09.2026, the respondents have immediately issued a Relieving Order on 25.09.2026.

4. Hence, applicant has filed the instant M.A No. 181/2026 seeking stay of the impugned relieving order dated 25.09.2026 relieving her from KV No. 1, Lamphelpat to KV No. 1, AFS, Jorhat.

5. Sri M. K. Mazumder, learned counsel for the respondents submits that it is not a regular transfer matter,

SINGSIT

applicant is a surplus staff and there is no sanction post at Imphal. Her service is required in Jorhat and the competent authority has considered her case but could not acceded to her prayer as there is organisational requirements.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

7. Since the daughter of the applicant is in mid academic session and going to appear her Board Exam, the presence and care of the mother is required at this crucial period. She is also ready to undergo the transfer order once the academic session is over. The Honble Apex Court in the Director of School Education Vs O. Kuruppa Thevan [1994 Supp (2) SCC 666] held that due weight ought to be given to the educational interests of the children of an employee while taking decisions affecting their studies.

8. In view of the above, M.A No. 181/2026 is allowed. The impugned Relieving Order dated 25.09.2026 as well as the impugned Transfer Order dated 31.08.2026 are stayed till the next date.

9. Issue notice to the respondents in O.A.

SINGSIT

10. Since Sri M. K. Mazumder, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the official respondents, hence, issuance of notice to the official respondents is dispensed with. Applicant is directed to take steps with regard to service of notice to private respondents.

11. Respondents are granted 4 weeks time to file reply.

12. List the O.A on 11.11.2026 under the heading of Orders.

(MALLIKA ARYA) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)

MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

SS

SINGSIT