Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya ... vs Rajni Kant Bhatt ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6536 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:27359-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 693/2023

(1) Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Through Its Chairman, Plot Number- 2343, 2Nd Floor, Aana Sagar Circle Road, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.

(2) The Chief Manager, Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Regional Office, 1St Floor, Khadi Flex Building, Housing Board Tiraha, Udaipur Road, Banswara. (3) The Branch Manager, Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Branch Delwada Lokiya, District Banswara.

----Appellant Versus Rajni Kant Bhatt S/o Shri Purna Shankar Bhatt, Aged About 59 Years, Resident Of Gauraksha Colony, Near Bvb School, Ratitalai, Banswara (Rural), Banswara.

                                                                    ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)              :    Mr. Anil Kumar Bhandari
                                   Mr. Dinesh Choudhary
For Respondent(s)             :    -----



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

Judgment

29/08/2023

1. This special appeal writ is filed by the appellants challenging

the order dated 10.8.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.10738/2023, whereby while issuing

notices of the writ petition, learned Single Judge has stayed the

effect and operation of the order dated 1.7.2023 qua the

respondent.

2. The respondent is working as Branch Manager in the

appellant-bank and vide order dated 1.7.2023, he was transferred

from Branch Delwada Lokiya, District Banswara to Simalwada,

[2023:RJ-JD:27359-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-693/2023]

Dungarpur. It was contended before the learned Single Judge by

the counsel for the respondent that the transfer of the respondent

is contrary to the judgment passed by this Court in Dr. Pushpa

Mehta Vs. RCSAT & Ors., reported in RLW 2000 (1) (Raj.) 233. It

was also contended before the learned Single Judge that the

respondent is going to be superannuated on 30.4.2024.

Considering the same, learned Single Judge while issuing notice to

the appellants has stayed the transfer of the respondent.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the

learned Single Judge has granted the final relief by way of interim

order which is not permissible. It is also contended that the

respondent has concealed several facts and has obtained the stay

order.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants, we are of

the view that the appellants can very well approach the learned

Single Judge with a prayer for vacating ex-parte interim order.

Hence, we are not inclined to entertain the instant special appeal.

5. Accordingly, the special appeal writ is dismissed. Stay

application also stands dismissed.

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J

16-RP/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)