Disposed

Nonaram Meghwal v. Rsrtc and Anr.

Rajasthan HC16 Oct 2015CW/12243/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a transfer order as it was filed without a prior representation on difficulties. It granted liberty to file a detailed representation and stayed relief pending the respondent's decision within seven days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a representation; relief from transfer to the distant place stayed pending the respondent's speaking order on the representation.

Nonaram Meghwal Vs Rsrtc and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

: O R D E R :

¶4

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12243/2015

Nonaram Meghwal

vs.

RSRTC & Anr.

Date of Order 16.10.2015

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶11

Mr. Rajesh Shah, for the petitioner.

¶12

BY THE COURT:

¶13

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the transfer order dated 12.10.2015, whereby the petitioner has been transferred to another remote Depot.

¶14

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner besides being a low paid employee, is nearing retirement and therefore, passing of the order by the respondents cannot be sustained.

¶15

It is further submitted that this Court in the case of Smt. Pushpa Mehta v. RSCAT : 2000(1) RLW 233 has held that unless there are compelling reasons, ordinarily, an employee should not be disturbed from the place of his posting, when he is at the verge of retirment.

¶16

From perusal of the record, it is apparent that before approaching this Court, the petitioner has not even chosen to make a representation to the respondent authorities to make it known to them regarding the difficulty and / or status of the

¶17

¶18

petitioner being low paid / nearing retirement. The writ petition without even filing representation to the respondents, cannot be entertained.

¶19

Faced with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to file a representation and limited protection till the representation is decided be granted else the petitioner would be relieved pursuant to the transfer order and he would have to join at distant place.

¶20

In the facts and circumstances, wherein as noticed hereinbefore, the writ petition on part of the petitioner cannot be entertained, the petitioner is given liberty to approach the respondents by way of a detailed representation raising all the issues as raised in the present writ petition and it would be required of the respondents to decide the said representation by a speaking order within a period of seven days. If a representation in this regard is filed by the petitioner by 19.10.2015, till 28.10.2015, the petitioner may not be relieved, the posting would follow the result of the decision of the representation.

¶21

(ARUN BHANSALI), J.

¶22

Taruna

Nonaram Meghwal v. Rsrtc and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nonaram Meghwal v. Rsrtc and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haney Sunariwal Vs State and Ors.

State of Raj. Vs M/S. Nav Bharat Const. Company

Ram Lal Meghwal and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Dr. Suresh Chandra Shrimali Vs State and Ors.

Raj. State Roadway Employees Union, Vs Rsrtc and Ors.

Ramchandra Gurjar Vs Rsrtc and Anr.