Meena Khimesra vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 9520 Raj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9520 Raj
Judgement Date : 21 July, 2022

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Meena Khimesra vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 July, 2022

Bench: Rekha Borana

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9227/2019

Meena Khimesra W/o Surendra Singh Khimesra, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of Khimesra Ka Timba, House No. 25, Udaipur - At Present Working As Teacher Grade-Iii At Govt. Upper Primary School, Govardhan Villas Gramin, Girwa, District Udaipur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Secondary Education, Udaipur.

5. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary Education, Udaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Karan Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sarvan Kumar, for Mr. Hemant Choudhary

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

21/07/2022

Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel

for the respondents are agreeable to the fact that the controversy

in question rests covered by the judgment passed in the case of

Kanheya Lal Meena v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.9169/2019) decided on 28.04.2022.

In the case of Kanheya Lal Meena (supra), this Court

observed as under:-

(2 of 3) [CW-9227/2019]

"Learned counsel for the respondents states that the controversy involved in the present matters has been decided in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9282/2019; Babu Lal Puniya v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. In Babu Lal Puniya case (supra), it had been held as under:

"From the above operational guidelines, it is apparent that it is only the DEO (Hqrs), Secondary Education, who has the jurisdiction to pass the orders for transfer of the petitioners from Primary Education to Secondary Education and accord postings being their appointing authority and, therefore, entire petition based on the submission regarding lack of jurisdiction, has no substance.

Consequently, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners are dismissed leaving it open for them to approach the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, in case they have any grievance qua the issues other the authority of the DEO (Hqrs), Secondary Education."

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not refute the above position but he make a specific submission that the compliance of Rule 6D of the Rules of 1971 has not been made in the present matter and the respondents be directed to make the compliance of the same.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16671/2015: Surendra Kumar Bhatt & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

In Surendra Kumar Bhatt's case (supra), the following observation had been made by the Court:

"Accordingly, while not interfering in the impugned order for the reasons given above, the writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondents to look into the seniority of all teachers, so transferred. If any senior teacher is left out and at the

(3 of 3) [CW-9227/2019]

same time, junior teacher has been transferred, then they are directed to correct the order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

It is made clear that compliance of the directions given by this Court would be made in strict terms and while revising the list, if so required. It would be in strict adherence to the provisions of Rule 6D of the Rules of 1971 and in future also, similar exercise would not be taken in violation of the said rule, otherwise the Department is directed to fix the responsibility of the officer concerned so that litigation may not come on account of violation of Rule 6D of the Rules of 1971."

In view of the ratio as laid down in Babu Lal Puniya's case (supra), while making the interim orders passed in the writ petition absolute, the present writ petition is disposed of.

The respondents would be at liberty to pass fresh transfer orders in light of the subsequent judgments. It is made clear that the adherence to the provisions of Rule 6C of the Rajasthan Education State and Subordinate Services Rules, 2021 (akin to Rule 6D of the Rules of 1971) would be strictly made as laid down in the case of Surendra Kumar Bhatt."