23.07.2026 Sl. No.28 Ct. No.14 gd IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA/13624/2026 TAPAS NASKAR VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Mr. Atreya Chakraborty …for the Petitioner. Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh Mr. Asit Kumar De …for the State. Mr. Gourav Das …for DPSC, South 24-Parganas. 1. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. By the present writ petition the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondent authorities for setting aside of the order under Memo No.796- L/DPSC/S24Pgs/25 dated 3rd November, 2025 issued by Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas. 3. This is second round of litigation. 4. The petitioner previously filed a writ petition being WPA 25357 of 2024 seeking intra district transfer from one school to another on medical ground. The writ petition was disposed of on 11th August, 2025 directing the Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 24th August, 2024 strictly in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Pursuant 2 thereto, by the impugned order dated 3rd November, 2025, the prayer of the petitioner was turned down by the Chairman of the Council. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 5. Mr. Atreya Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made a representation seeking transfer on medical ground. The Chairman rejected the prayer of the petitioner citing Rule 3 of the West Bengal Primary Education (Transfer of Teachers including Head Teacher) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the „said Rules, 2002‟) observing that the Pupil-Teacher Ratio (in short, „PTR‟) would be affected. On transfer of the petitioner, the school would become a single teacher school. However, it failed to take into account that such prayer has been made on medical ground. As per amended provision of Rule 3A in case the transfer is sought for on medical ground, PTR of applicant’s school may not be applicable. He seeks for setting aside of the impugned order and for reconsideration of the prayer of the petitioner dated 24th August, 2024 strictly in light of the existing rules. 6. Mr. Gourav Das, learned advocate appearing for District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas concedes to the said submissions. 7. Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh, learned advocate appearing for the State leaves the matter to the discretionary of the Court. 3 8. Upon hearing the submissions of learned advocates for respective parties, the only issue which falls for consideration is whether the impugned reasoned order of Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas dated 3rd November, 2025 is sustainable or not. 9. The prayer of the petitioner has been turned down by the authority citing Rule 3 of Rules of 2002 observing adverse PTR in the school in the event of transfer of the petitioner. It is relevant to note that provision of Rule 3, which has been quoted in the impugned order, is prior to amendment. Be that as it may, Rule 3 as per amended provision provides that each Council shall maintain the required numbers of teachers in each school as per provisions specified in the Schedule of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Thus, the said rule manifest that the PTR should be maintained as per Schedule of the RTE Act, 2009. Now, the question, which arises at this stage, is whether the provisions of Rule 3 creates an absolute bar to consider prayer for transfer on medical ground in the situation of adverse PTR. 10. Indisputably the petitioner sought for transfer on medical ground. In order to examine the issue it would be apposite to reproduce the relevant amended provisions of sub-clause (b) and (c) of Rule 3A of the Rules of 2002 as hereunder: “3A. While considering the transfer applications made under sub-rule (3), Council shall examine the followings: 4 (a) x x x (b) PTR of applicant's school may not require to be considered against the application submitted on grounds stated in sub-rule 3(a) to (d). (c) If PTR in applicant's present school becomes adverse due to proposed transfer of the applicant on grounds stated in sub-rule 3(a) to (d), the Council may initiate transfer on its own motion from schools within the district having excess teacher. The Commissioner of School Education shall supervise the process and ensure filling up of such vacancies with utmost priority and send progress report fortnightly to the School Education Department.” 11. Upon bare reading of the aforesaid provisions, it appears that sub-clause (b) of Rule 3A(b) provides that the PTR of applicant’s school may not be considered against application submitted on grounds stated in sub-rule 3(a) to (d). Needless to mention that sub-rule 3(a) to (d) provides the grounds on which an application for transfer can be considered including medical ground. Further sub-clause (c) provides the procedure to deal with such exigent situation that if PTR in applicant’s present school becomes adverse due to proposed transfer of the applicant on grounds stated in sub-rule 3(a) to (d), the Council may initiate transfer on its own motion from schools within the district having excess teacher. The Commissioner of School Education shall supervise the process and ensure filling up of such vacancies with utmost priority and send progress report fortnightly to the School Education Department. Thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid provisions, it cannot be said that Rule 3 creates an absolute bar for considering prayer for transfer on medical ground. If the provisions of Rule 3 is considered to create absolute bar, in that event the provisions of Rule 3A would be illusory and redundant. 5 12. In view of the above, the finding of the Council in the impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 3rd November, 2025 of respondent no.6, Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas is hereby set aside. 13. Respondent no.6, Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas is directed to reconsider the representation of the petitioner dated 24th August, 2024 seeking transfer on medical ground and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law upon notice to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. 14. The reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week from passing thereof. 15. Respondent no.6 is granted liberty to seek medical examination of the petitioner prior to consideration of representation of the petitioner. 16. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to Respondent no.6, Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24- Parganas, for necessary compliance. 17. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition being WPA 13624 of 2026 stands disposed of. 18. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 19. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 20. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 6 21. There shall be no order as to costs. 22. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 23. Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.)