Teachers’ Should Focus On Imparting Knowledge To Needy Students, Not Retaining Comfortable Postings: Madras HC

The Madras High Court recently observed that a teacher should focus on providing knowledge and skills to needy students rather than holding on to comfortable postings while refusing relief to a school teacher challenging his transfer.

Justice CV Karthikeyan further observed that the school teacher should set a good example for the students by not questioning every administrative order.

“The goal of working as a teacher is to impart knowledge and skills to needy students, not to retain his own comfortable posting. The petitioner should also understand that he should set a good example for the students by not questioning every administrative order,” the court stated.

K Singaravelu, the petitioner, stated that he was appointed as BT Assistant (Geography) following a selection test conducted by the Teachers Recruitment Board and was then transferred to Government Girls Higher Secondary School Thiruthuraipoondi, Thiruvarur District in 2012.

Singaravelu further claimed that as a result of a Government decision to set staff strength, it was discovered that he had surpassed the school’s sanctioned strength and was thus ordered to be transferred. He contended that this decision violated State Government Orders and that his current posting should not be disturbed.

He further brought the court’s attention to certain Government Orders passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu concerning the appointment of teachers and the transfer of surplus instructors.

However, the court did observe that because the petitioner was excess at the school, he should have been more likely to voluntarily accept the transfer to another school where his services were far more needed.

The court further pointed out that the impugned order only ordered the petitioner to attend the transfer counselling and that he had the opportunity to raise objections during the counselling. It further added that the petitioner should not expect a specific order will be passed and should instead present all of his arguments during the counselling.

As a result, the court declined to give any remedy and rejected the petition.