Allowed

Rajendra Kumar Joshi v. Rsrtc and Ors.

Rajasthan HC18 Dec 2018CW/84/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition and quashed a transfer order from Bikaner to Jaisalmer. The court held that the transfer was made to accommodate another employee without administrative exigency, ignoring the petitioner's retiring status and family medical needs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed; the transfer order dated 20.12.2017 (Annex.5) qua the petitioner was quashed and set aside.

Rajendra Kumar Joshi Vs Rsrtc and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ No. 84/2018

¶2

Rajendra Kumar Joshi S/o Shri Karnidan Ji Joshi, Resident Of "kapil Vastu", Hanuman Hatha, District Bikaner, Rajasthan.

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Headquarter At Jaipur Through Its Managing Director.

¶6

Dy. General Manager Administration, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Headquarter, Jaipur.

¶7

Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Bikaner Depot, Bikaner

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Vyas. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suniel Purohit.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶11

18/12/2018

¶12

The matter comes upon application filed by the respondents under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India seeking vacation of the interim order.

¶13

At the request of counsel for both the parties, the matter has been finally heard.

¶14

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 20.12.2017, whereby, the petitioner has been transferred from Bikaner Depot to Jaisalmer Depot.

¶15

It is inter alia claimed by the petitioner that one Ghanshyam Saraswat by order dated 13.11.2017 (Annex.4) was transferred from Bikaner to Jaisalmer, however, the said order was canceled without indicating any reason and by the impugned order instead of that Ghanshyam Saraswat, the petitioner has been transferred to Jaisalmer in violation of transfer policy as the petitioner is nearing retirement i.e. he is schedule to retire in the month of September, 2019, his wife is under medical care at Bikaner and his mother is

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CW-84/2018]

¶18

aged 95 years and, therefore, order impugned deserves to be quashed and set aside.

¶19

Learned counsel for the respondents - RSRTC made submissions that the petitioner has been transferred on account of administrative exigency from Bikaner Depot to Jaisalmer Depot and the order does not call for any interference.

¶20

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

¶21

Apparently on 13.11.2017, for accommodating one Mr. Satish Acharya from Jaisalmer to Bikaner, one Ghanshyam Saraswat was transferred from Bikaner to Jaisalmer. Whereafter, again to accommodate the said Ghanshyam Saraswat, the petitioner has been transferred from Bikaner to Jaisalmer.

¶22

Apparently the respondents just for the sake of adjusting a particular employee, have been passing orders of transfer of one employee instead of other without even looking at the exigencies and the plea raised regarding administrative exigency apparently has no basis, nor any reasons have been indicated in both the transfers orders dated 13.11.2017 and 20.12.2017. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is due to retire in the month of September, 2019 and his mother is now aged 96 years. In view thereof, the order dated 20.12.2017 passed by the respondents cannot be sustained.

¶23

Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated 20.12.2017 (Annex.5) qua the petitioner is quashed and set aside.

¶24

No order as to costs.

¶25

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶26

63-Sumit/-

¶27

(3 of 3) [CW-84/2018]

Rajendra Kumar Joshi v. Rsrtc and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar Joshi v. Rsrtc and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govind Kumar Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Balu Ram and Ors. Vs State of Raj. and Ors.

Dilip Katara Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil Kumar Vs the University Grants Commission

Natwar Lal Vs Distt.and Sessions Judge, Dungarpur and Anr.

Murari Lal Vs State of Rajasthan