Ghanshyam Mali vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:6362)
2025 Latest Caselaw 6396 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ghanshyam Mali vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:6362) on 3 February, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:6362]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2498/2025

Ghanshyam Mali S/o Gheesu Lal Mali, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
Kailash Cinema Ke Piche, Ward No. 4, Gangapur, District
Bhilwara (Raj.).
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
         Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
         Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2.       The Director, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj
         Department,          Government              Of      Rajasthan,      Jaipur,
         Rajasthan.
3.       The    Additional        Commissioner-Cum-Joint                Secretary-I,
         Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
         Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bhilwara,
         Rajasthan.
5.       The    Block      Development            Officer,      Panchayat    Samiti,
         Sahada, District Bhilwara.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :    Mr. Pawan Singh Rathore.
For Respondent(s)             :    Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG with
                                   Mr. Pawan Bharti.



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral)

03/02/2025

1. Petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks quashing of an order dated

15.01.2025 (Annex.-1), vide which he has been transferred from

Panchayat Samiti Sahada to Panchayat Samiti Kareda.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner

is 59 years old and he is at the fag end of his service career, as his

[2025:RJ-JD:6362] (2 of 2) [CW-2498/2025]

retirement is due on 28.02.2025. He relies on the Division Bench

judgment rendered in Dr. Pushpa Mehta Vs. State [2000 (2) WLC

725] and contends that the impugned transfer order is also

contrary to the judgment ibid.

3. Whereas learned counsel for respondent argues that transfer

is an integral part of service conditions of a government employee

and the same arise out of the administrative exigencies.

Therefore, no indulgence is warranted by this Court.

4. Having heard the rival contentions and on perusal of the case

file, I am of the opinion that petitioner deserves indulgence in light

of the impending date of superannuation i.e. 28.02.2025.

5. As an upshot, writ petition is allowed. Impugned transfer

order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.-1) qua the petitioner is quashed.

Respondents are directed to either accommodate the petitioner on

the same post or an alternative post in the same district i.e.

Bhilwara.

6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

(ARUN MONGA),J 43-/Jitender/Rmathur/-

                                   Whether fit for reporting:   Yes     /    No









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)