Ramniwas Saini vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 12906 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 12906 Raj
Judgement Date : 10 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ramniwas Saini vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 10 September, 2025

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:40433]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17113/2025

Ramniwas Saini S/o Shri Arjunram Saini, Aged About 55 Years,
Dhani Bhalpuriya, Jhadla, Keerapura, Arniya, Dausa (Raj.).
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       The    State      Of     Rajasthan,         Through        The   Secretary,
         Department        Of     Animal        Husbandry,          Government    Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.       The     Director,       Directorate          Of      Animal      Husbandry
         Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.       The    Joint    Director,       Animal        Husbandry       Department,
         Barmer District Barmer.
4.       The Joint Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Dausa
         District Dausa.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Deepak Pareek
For Respondent(s)            :     Ms. Rakhi Choudhary, Dy. GC



               HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

10/09/2025

1. The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking

following reliefs:-

(i) The impugned transfer order dated 09.05.2025 Annex.P/1 and order dated 13.05.2025 Annex.P/2 passed by the respondent no. 2 may kindly be quashed and set aside with all natural benefits qua the petitioners.

(ii) The respondents may kindly be directed to post the petitioner at the place where he was working prior to passing the order dated 09.05.2025.

(iii) That the writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be decided in terms of the judgment dated 20.08.2025 Annex.P/10.

(Uploaded on 10/09/2025 at 06:09:53 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:40433] (2 of 4) [CW-17113/2025]

(iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

(v) Writ Petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with cost."

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is serving as a

Livestock Inspector in the respondent department and was

transferred to the border district of Barmer vide order dated

09.05.2025 (Annex.1), issued in view of the prevailing war

situation. His place of posting was subsequently changed on

13.05.2025 (Annex.2). Due to the emergency, the Department of

Personnel (DoP) had suspended all types of leave for government

employees vide order dated 08.05.2025 (Annex.3), which was

later withdrawn on 16.05.2025 (Annex.3) after normalization of

the situation. Similar emergency postings were made across

departments, and upon the announcement of a ceasefire, such

orders were widely withdrawn. In the petitioner's department as

well, directions were issued by the Minister and the Chief

Minister's Office for withdrawal of the petitioner's transfer order

dated 09.05.2025. Despite this, no action has been taken by the

respondent authorities. The petitioner had earlier challenged the

said transfer in SBCWP No. 15036/2025, which was allowed by

this Court on 20.08.2025 (Annex.10), directing the respondents to

repatriate him to his original posting. The present matter is fully

covered by the said judgment, yet no compliance has been made

by the respondents. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by

the order dated 22.08.2025 passed in SBCWP No.15007/2025:

(Uploaded on 10/09/2025 at 06:09:53 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:40433] (3 of 4) [CW-17113/2025]

Navratan Verma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., whereby,

the writ petition was allowed. Relevant portion of the order is

reproduced as under:-

"8. This Court in similar matters had taken decision that the petitioners' case should be taken into consideration and the petitioners shall be repatriated to the existing posts which the petitioners were occupying prior to their transfer. In case, such a post is already filled-in, they shall be considered for any other posts.

9. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents is that there are administrative exigencies which cannot be countenanced at this stage for the reason that the repatriation is required to be done by applying equal and non-discriminatory approach. This order shall not come in the way of the respondents to take decision afresh depending upon the administrative exigencies. The argument advanced cannot be taken into account at this stage. If such argument is allowed, it would amount to selective repatriation which would amount to conferring unbridled discretionary powers on the appointing authority. Therefore, the writ petition is required to be allowed.

10. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to dispose of the representations of the petitioners by complying with the directions of the Minister and shall repatriate the petitioners to the posts which they were occupying prior to the transfer, if such posts are kept vacant and if such posts are already filed-in by the date of compliance of this order, the respondents are directed to consider repatriation of the petitioners to some other posting by considering the choice of the petitioners.

It is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of the respondent-Department to take a decision on transfer basing on the administrative exigencies and as per the Policy of the Government.