MANA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order of his transfer dated 25.2.2009 by which he has been transferred from Patwar Mandal Bheenmal to Patwar Mandal Modra by the order of the District Collector dated 25.2.2009 (Annex.1). The petitioner has challenged this order on the ground that petitioner has been transferred just to accommodate respondent No. 4 as well as on the ground that transfer order, which has been passed without recording any satisfaction by the Collector that it is necessary in the interest of work or to fill up the vacancies created due to any reason, transfer is necessary. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner as per Rule 9 and 412 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Records) Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1957) there is a specific bar against the transfer of Patwari and it is specifically prohibited that "no transfer of Patwari should be made to accommodate individuals". The Collector can transfer a Patwari only on being satisfied "that it is necessary in interest of work or to fill up vacancies created due to various reasons." Learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment delivered in the case of Dr. Babu Lal Meghwal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.,2005 2 WLC(Raj) 196and Murlidhar Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Anr. 2005(2) 413.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the State as well as learned Counsel for the private respondent submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case delivered in Mrs. Shilpi Bose and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors., 1991 AIR(SC) 532held that if the transfer is made by a competent authority on request of an employee then that is not in violation to any mandatory rule and, therefore, the intervention of the High Court was declared illegal in such matter of transfer.