A division bench of Justices B R Gavai and S K Shinde was hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the government resolution, dated September 12, 2017.
According to the petitions, the September GR was contrary to a resolution of February 27 by which the Maharashtra government laid out an elaborate policy for transfer of teachers working in schools run by zilla parishads.
The petitions claimed that the September resolution gives power to the authorities to arbitrarily select teachers for transfer.
The bench, after hearing arguments, recently accepted the petitioners' contentions and said when the courts have upheld the February resolution and also directed the state government to proceed further with the implementation of the resolution, the government ought not to have come up with the impugned resolution of September.
"No doubt that there are inherent limitations on our jurisdiction while entertaining challenge to policy decisions of the government. Normally, this court would be very slow in interfering with policy of the state. We are aware that matters pertaining to policy decisions are best left to the discretion of the state," the court said.
The court further observed that the GR of September carves out various classes and enables authorities to mete out discriminatory treatment.
"Whereas the government resolution dated February 27, 2017 provided equitable treatment to all the employees of a particular class and hence prima facie we find the impugned government resolution dated September 12, 2017 to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India," the court said.
The government had told the court that it could not implement the February resolution due to pendency of various petitions challenging the same and hence, it issued a fresh resolution in September.
"We are of the prima facie view that when the government resolution of February 2017 has been upheld by the high court by way of two separate orders, there was no occasion for the state government to have come up with a fresh resolution," the high court observed.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
