Laxman Ram Beniwal vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 6508 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Laxman Ram Beniwal vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 February, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:7005]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2893/2025

Laxman Ram Beniwal S/o Shri Teja Ram Beniwal, Aged About 59
Years, R/o Davi Sagar Nagaur Raj.
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary
         To Government Rular Development And Panchayati Raj
         Department Of Rajasthan Government Secretariat, Jaipur,
         Rajasthan
2.       The Deputy Commissioner And Joint Secretary (Second ),
         Department Of Rular Development And Panchayati Raj
         Department Of Rajasthan Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Nagaur Raj.
4.       The    Development          Officer,      Panchayat        Samiti   Nagaur
         District Nagaur Raj.
5.       Banshilal Jotiyana, Presently Posted And Working As
         Assistant Engineer , Panchyat Samiti Jayal District Nagaur
         Raj.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. O.P. Sangwa
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Pawan Bharti on behalf of
                                   Mr. I.R Choudhary, AAG



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral)

04/02/2025

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

24.01.2025 (Annex.-5) vide which he has been transferred from

Panchayat Samiti Jayal, District Nagaur to Panchayat Samiti

Mundwa, District Nagaur. He is 59 years old and he is at the fag

end of his service career, as his retirement is due on 30.11.2025.

2. Heard.

[2025:RJ-JD:7005] (2 of 2) [CW-2893/2025]

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, relies on

the Division Bench judgment rendered in Dr. Pushpa Mehta Vs.

State [2000 (2) WLC 725] and contends, in my view rightly so,

that the impugned transfer order is contrary to the judgment ibid.

3. Whereas learned counsel for respondents 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 his impending date of superannuation i.e. 30.11.2025.

5. As an upshot, the instant petition is allowed. Impugned

transfer order dated 24.01.2025 (Annex.-5) is quashed.

Respondents are directed to either accommodate the petitioner on

the same post or an alternative post at the same place where he

was working, prior to passing of the impugned transfer order.

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

(ARUN MONGA),J 63-AK Chouhan/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)