Rajasthan High Court
Nitin Sharma Son Of Shri Kishan ... vs The State Of Rajasthan on 16 December, 2021
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14779/2021
Nitin Sharma Son Of Shri Kishan Sharma, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Of 40, Shankar Nagar, Opp. Road No. 1 VKI Area, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
Of Forest, Govt Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest (HOFF),
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Jaipur.
4. Rajendra Singh Jakhar, Range Forest Officer Grade-I,
Range Dudu (Office Of Deputy Conservator of Forest,
Jaipur) Grass Farm Nursery, Khatipura, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Iliyas Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akhil Simlote with
Mr. Akshay Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
16/12/2021
This writ petition has been filed assailing the legality and
validity of the order dated 08.12.2021 passed by the Rajasthan
Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for brevity. "the Tribunal")
whereby, the stay application filed by the petitioner/appellant in
Appeal No.4465/2021 preferred by him against the order dated
30.09.2021 posting him from Range Nahargah Sanctuary, Jaipur
to Rajasthan State Biodiversity Board, has been dismissed.
The facts in brief are that the petitioner was appointed vide
order dated 06.12.2006 as Forester and was posted at Dausa.
Vide order dated 01.06.2009, he was transferred to Jaipur. Vide
(2 of 5) [CW-14779/2021]
order dated 07.03.2017, he was promoted as Range Forest Officer
Grade-II and was posted in Jaipur. Vide order dated 31.01.2019,
the appellant was posted to Range Jamwaramgarh from Range
Settlement, Deputy Conservator of Forest, Wildlife, Jaipur. Vide
order dated 03.09.2019, he was posted in the Rescue Operation,
Office of Department of Conservator of Forest Wildlife, Jaipur. Vide
order impugned dated 30.09.2021, he has been posted to
Rajasthan Biodiversity Mandal, Jaipur. Assailing the order dated
30.09.2021, the petitioner has preferred an appeal. Vide order
impugned dated 08.12.2021, learned Tribunal has dismissed the
stay application preferred by the petitioner therein.
Assailing the order, learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that he has been transferred thrice within a short span
of two years and nine months. He submitted that the petitioner,
who is holding the post of Range Forest Officer Grade-II, has been
transferred against the post of Range Forest Officer Grade-I, only
to accommodate the respondent No.4, which is impermissible.
Learned counsel submitted that a person cannot be transferred to
a post which he is ineligible to hold. In support of his submissions,
he relies upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in case of
Arun Chauhan (Dr.) Vs. The State of Rajasthan, 2005 (2)
WLC 719. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed
and the order impugned dated 08.12.2021 be quashed the order
dated 30.09.2021 be stayed during pendecy of the appeal.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No-4/caveator
submitted that it is not a case of transfer as "Transfer" under Rule
7 (38) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (for brevity, "the
Rules of 1951") envisages movement of a Government servant
from one headquarter station to another headquarter station,
(3 of 5) [CW-14779/2021]
either (a) to take up the duties of a new post, or (b) in
consequence of a change of his headquarter. He submitted that
vide order dated 30.09.2021, the petitioner has been posted
within the same headquarter, i.e., Jaipur and hence, it is not a
case of transfer. He submitted that the petitioner has been posted
vide orders dated 31.01.2019 and 03.09.2019 also within the
Jaipur Headquarter and hence, none of these orders can be
reckoned as transfer order under the Rules of 1951. Learned
counsel submitted that the learned Tribunal has passed the order
dated 08.12.2021 taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect
which warrants no interference by this Court in its writ jurisdiction.
He further submits that the nature of job and responsibility of
Range Forest Officer Grade-I and Range Forest Officer Grade-II
are same with difference in pay band only. He, therefore, prays
that the writ petition be dismissed.
Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the
record.
Rule 7 (38) of the Rules of 1951 provides that a transfer
stipulates change of headquarter of an employee. Indisputably, in
the present case, there is no change of headquarter of the
petitioner. He has been posted within the headquarter Jaipur vide
order impugned dated 30.09.2021. Similarly, neither under the
order dated 31.01.2019 nor, under the order dated 03.09.2019,
the petitioner has been transferred rather, he has only been
posted within the headquarter, Jaipur. Hence, this Court is not
persuaded to accept the submission of the learned counsel that
vide order impugned, he has been transferred or that within a
short span of two years and nine months, he has been transferred
thrice.
(4 of 5) [CW-14779/2021]
Out of his total service period of about 25 years, for a period
of more than twenty two and a half years, the petitioner has
remained posted in Jaipur and since the month of June, 2009, the
petitioner has remained posted at the headquarter, Jaipur. The
learned Tribunal has recorded a finding that the petitioner has
been posted vide order impugned dated 30.09.2021 to a place
which is in Jaipur City itself hardly 3 to 4 kilometers from his
earlier place of posting. The aforesaid finding has not been
assailed by the petitioner. The learned Tribunal has passed the
order impugned taking into consideration the submissions raised
by the learned counsels for the respective parties in the backdrop
of factual foundation and the statutory provisions which suffers
from no illegality or perversity warranting interference of this
Court in its supervisory jurisdiction vide Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.
The judgment in case of Arun Chauhan (Dr.) (supra) is of
no help to the petitioner. Therein, the respondent holding the post
of Senior Specialist in Gynecology as also the post of Principal
Medical Officer, Bhilwara was sought to be transferred to a far
distant place i.e., Jaisalmer only to accommodate the appellant-
Arun Chauhan (Dr.), who was a Junior Specialist in Gynecology. In
the singular facts of the case, this Court was pleased to quash the
transfer order of the respondent therein. Herein, no such position
is obtaining. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not satisfy
this Court as to how his service conditions are going to be
adversely affected or he will suffer prejudice on account of his
posting in pursuance of order dated 30.09.2021. Even otherwise
also, it is settled law that no employee has vested right to remain
posted at a particular place/against a particular post.
(5 of 5) [CW-14779/2021]
Upshot of the aforesaid discussions is that the writ petition is
devoid of merit and is dismissed accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Sudha/98
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
