Rakesh Pandya vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:43404)
2024 Latest Caselaw 9410 Raj

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 9410 Raj
Judgement Date : 23 October, 2024

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rakesh Pandya vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:43404) on 23 October, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:43404]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17681/2024

Rakesh Pandya S/o Sh. Hari Kishan Pandya, Aged About 40
Years, R/o Near UP Swasthya Kendra, Vadakundali, Dungarpur,
At Present Ldc At Gram Panchayat Kotda Bada, Panchayat Samiti
Garhi, District Banswara.
                                                                               ----Petitioner
                                           Versus
1.         State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Rural And
           Panchayati         Raj      Department            Govt.        Of      Rajasthan,
           Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.         The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Banswara,
           District Banswara.
3.         The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Garhi,
           District Banswara.
                                                                          ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)                :     Mr. Devendra Sanwalot



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

23/10/2024

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a

judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered in S.B.

Civil Writ Petition No.2909/2024 "Kera Ram Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors." and other connected matters decided on

30.04.2024 in the following terms:-

"CONCLUSION:-

31. While concluding, in order to avoid needless litigation in future, this Court deems it appropriate to frame/issue following guidelines in matters of transfer of Panchayati Raj officials of the rank of Village Development Officers/Assistant Administrative

[2024:RJ-JD:43404] (2 of 4) [CW-17681/2024]

Officer/Gram Sewak/LDC/Junior Assistants/Junior Technical Assistant/Gram Vikas Adhikari :-

Transfer Guidelines (I). **District-Level Transfers:** Panchayat officials recruited for district-

cadre posts cannot and ought not to be transferred in routine outside their respective districts, except wherever permissible under the Act and the Rules framed there under .

(II). **Consultation for Transfers:** Transfers must be made only after consulting the Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti.(III). **Zilla Parishad Transfers:** Transfers within a Zilla Parishad require consultation with the Pramukh of the Zilla Parishad.

(IV). **State Overriding Power:** The State can make transfers without consulting the Pradhan or the Pramukh.

(V). **Intra-District Transfers:** The State has the authority to transfer Panchayat officials within or between Panchayat Samitis within the same district.

(VI). **Inter-District and Intra-Zilla Parishad Transfers:** The State can transfer officials from one Zilla Parishad to another, from a Panchayat Samiti to a Zilla Parishad, or within the same Zilla Parishad or Panchayat Samiti, with or without consultation of Pradhan or Pramukh. (VII). Section 89(8)(ii) of the Act, 1994 mandates that a Zilla Parishad can transfer an employee from a Panchayat Samiti only after consulting the Pradhans or Pramukhs of the respective Panchayat Samitis or Zilla Parishads involved in the transfer.(VIII). Scheme of Rules, 1996 envisage that the Zilla Parishad is the controlling authority for employees appointed in Panchayat Samitis. Transfers within a Zilla Parishad from one Panchayat Samiti to another must comply with Section 89(8)(ii), ensuring consultation with the respective Pradhans or Pramukhs. (IX). Under Section 89(8A) of the Act, 1994, Consultation is not required for transfers made under this section. It gives the State Government the power to stay or cancel transfer orders made under Section 89(8) or the associated rules.

(X). In Compliance with State Orders, The Chief Executive Officer/Vikas Adhikari are empowered must to execute transfer orders passed by the State Government, as interpreted by a harmonious reading of Rule 289(3) with Sub-section 89(8A). They do not have any independent power to pass transfer orders.

(XI). The Government must respect the role of the District Establishment Committee of the Zilla Parishad in issuing transfer orders/policies. The Committee is empowered to exercise transfer powers in accordance with Government policies and directions, ensuring that the Panchayati Raj institutions' constitutional status is upheld.

[2024:RJ-JD:43404] (3 of 4) [CW-17681/2024]

(XII). Inter-district transfer orders by other Departments must obtain consent from the Panchayati Raj department. 'Consent' implies a voluntary, informed decision, and must be explicitly stated through a conscious decision-making process, not assumed through tacit or non-resistant behavior.

32. The respondent no.1 is directed to issue necessary administrative instructions to the officials of the concerned Panchayati Raj officials to sensitize them about the aforesaid guidelines framed by this Court along with copy of the instant judgment. Needless to say, their non compliance would expose the respondents to the necessary consequences arising thereof.

33. With these observations, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned transfer orders are set aside qua the petitioners before this Court, with liberty to the respondents to pass fresh orders depending upon the administrative exigencies, but within the parameters of the directives issued by this Court as above. It is made clear that granting of a liberty to pass fresh orders shall not be construed to mean that the respondents must necessarily pass fresh transfer orders even in case no administrative exigency is otherwise made out.

34. No order as to costs."

2. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to

controvert the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner.

3. In view of the submissions made before this Court, the writ

petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a

representation within a period of 10 days from today along with a

copy of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Kera

Ram (supra) for redressal of his grievances in light of the said

judgment.

4. The respondents shall consider the representation of the

petitioner and if the case of the petitioner stands on similar

footing to the case of Kera Ram (supra), then the same relief be