The Kerala High Court (Ernakulam Bench) ruled that an Educational Agency, which has colleges under the jurisdiction of different Universities, cannot transfer a teacher from one college under a university to another college under a different University without the written request of the teachers, who have completed three years of service. Reference was made to Section 64A of the Kerala University Act, 1974, and Section 68A of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, 1985, to emphasize that when statutory authority is required to do something in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner or not at all.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S., therefore, upheld the Single Judge’s decisions that had quashed the inter-university transfer orders and directed reinstatement of teachers to their original positions. The Bench clarified that if the legislature intended to give authority to management for inter-university transfers without teacher consent, there would have been specific provisions to that effect.
The Bench critically examined the concept of “redeployment” used by management to justify transfers, noting that neither the Kerala University Act nor the MG University Act defines or authorizes “redeployment” or “deployment”. Using dictionary meanings, the Bench held that so-called redeployment is merely a transfer from one college to another, which must comply with inter-university transfer provisions.
Speaking for the Bench, Justice Muralee Krishna S. characterized the use of ‘redeployment’ as ‘a cunning attempt to effect inter-University transfer of a teacher from one college under a university to another college under a different University without the consent of the teacher concerned’. Accordingly, the Bench rejected the management’s argument about protecting seniority through ‘redeployment’, noting that University Acts provide seniority protection only for intra-university transfers, not inter-university transfers.
Briefly, this case dealt with the inter-university transfer of teachers by educational agencies having colleges affiliated to different universities in Kerala. The inter-university transfers were made citing workload adjustment requirements, which was opposed, contending a violation of statutory provisions requiring written consent for inter-university transfers.
Case Relied On:
Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mill Pvt. Ltd. [(2003) 2 SCC 111]
Case Distinguished:
Johnson George v. State of Kerala [2003 (2) KLT 676]
Appearances:
Advocate R.S. Lakshman, for the Appellant
Advocates Kaleeswaram Raj, P. Vijayakumar, M.R. Anison, Thulasi K. Raj, Aparna Narayan Menon, P.A. Rinusa, Anagha Renjith, M.U. Soorya,B. Harrylal, Thomas Abraham, and Surin George IPE, for the Respondent
