GHEWAR CHAND SONI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition the petitioner, working as a Lower Divisional Clerk with Agriculture Marketing Department, seeks to challenge the order of his transfer from Pali to Abu Road (impugned order Annex.P-1). It is contended that the petitioner is on the verge of retirement with about three years of service period left; that he is suffering from illness and has been transferred to a distant place at Abu Road and shall have difficulty in taking the medical facility; and that the persons who are staying in the office concerned even before the petitioner have been retained. It has further been contended that the impugned order of transfer is bad in law because no provision has been made for requisite allowances related with transfer. Learned Counsel has relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Dr. (Smt.) Pushpa Mehta v. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal,2000 2 WLC(Raj) 725.

(2.) Having given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and having examined the material placed on record, this Court is clearly of the opinion that this writ petition remains totally bereft of substance and does not merit admission.

(3.) So far the argument regarding approaching date of retirement with reference to the decision of this Court in Dr. (Smt.) Pushpa Mehta's case is concerned, it may be noticed that the appellant in the said case, Dr. (Smt.) Pushpa Mehta, working as professor in the Department of Micro-Biology was transferred from Kota to Udaipur and the second respondent Dr. (Smt.) Shanta Dubey was transferred in her place from Udaipur to Kota. The second respondent challenged the order of transfer before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal on the grounds that she was on the verge of retirement; that she was suffering from cancer; that her husband had expired about a year back; and that her younger son was studying at Udaipur. The Tribunal found that there was no administrative reason to transfer Dr. Dubey from Udaipur to Kota except to accommodate Dr. Mehta and, thus, set aside the order of transfer. The Hon'ble Division Bench noticed that the State chose not to challenge the order made by the Tribunal and the same was challenged only by Dr. Mehta by way of writ petition that was rejected by the learned Single Judge. In the back drop of such fact situation, Hon'ble Division Bench considered the submissions made on behalf of the writ petitioner-appellant about the limited grounds on which order of transfer could be challenged and the Hon'ble Division Bench noticed the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court cited before it and observed,-