Aurangabad: The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court has slammed the teachers who have approached it while opposing the government resolution (GR) on their transfer.
The court directed the government and education officials not to approve the teachers’ leave for September 27 and September 29 and mark them absent.
The court has now placed the hearing on the petitions on October 3.
Aggrieved by the GR on transfer of primary teachers in zilla parshad schools, hundreds of teachers approached the high court through different lawyers seeking cancellation of the GR.
On September 27, the bench expressed displeasure over the teachers’ presence in the court.
The petitions, filed by as many as 600 teachers, came up for hearing on Friday before a bench comprising Justices R M Borde and Vibha Kankanwadi.
The bench again noticed the presence of teachers in the court and observed that their attitude is “demonstrative of the fact they have absolutely no concern for the welfare of students and are not mindful of their pious duties.”
While listing the matter in urgent category, the bench observed “It is noticed that almost all the petitioners, who are teachers, were present before the court on September 27, leaving the students in the school without teachers. Absence of teachers from school definitely affects the academic activities.”
The court further observed: “The teachers were warned on the said date (September 27) and that they were specifically informed that mass absence of so many teachers in the schools would prejudicially affect academic activities in the school. In spite of such warming, it is noticed that large number of teachers who are petitioners, are present before the court today (Septemper 29) also.”
The bench added: “Considering this aspect, we direct the state and the concerned education officers to cancel leave of the petitioners, if at all they have tendered leave application at the concerned school and those petitioners-teachers who were not present for duty on September 27 and 29, their absence should be marked and the education officers shall not grant admissible leave to such teachers.”