POONAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATTER has come up on application Under Article 226(3) of the Constitution for vacation of ex -parte stay order passed by this Court dt.14.11.2006. However, looking to the nature of controversy, it is finally decided at this stage.

(2.) INSTANT petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order dt. 24th February, 2006 by which she was transferred from Ganganagar to Ratangarh, which was initially assailed before Service Appellate Tribunal. While rejecting appeal vide order dt. 22.03.2006, it was observed that petitioner remained posted in Ganganagar since 1996 and hardly went to other place for one month on two different occasions. Taking note thereof, it was further observed that concerned Member of Legislative Assembly of the Constituency has only made request to the then Minister for passing appropriate orders in regard to transfer and it is always open for the Government to consider while taking decision, if required, in the interest of administration and in these circumstances, if petitioner remain posted substantially since 1996 in Ganganagar and the decision has been taken by the authority to transfer her in the interest of administration from Ganganagar to Ratangarh under order impugned. It cannot be held to be arbitrary or in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , writ petition stands dismissed. Interim order passed by this Court dt.14.11.2006 stands vacated.