Allowed

Mukesh Verma S/O Devi Lal Verma v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Apr 2019SAW/572/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal regarding the dismissal of a transfer order. While upholding the principle of transfer as an administrative necessity, the Court was moved by the appellant's proximity to retirement and health issues. It directed the Managing Director to reconsider a detailed representation within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file a detailed representation before the Managing Director for consideration and decision within a fortnight.

Mukesh Verma S/O Devi Lal Verma Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 572/2019

¶3

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5422/2019

¶5

Mukesh Verma S/o Devi Lal Verma, aged 59 Years, R/o 52 B, Devi Ratan, Dayanand Colony, Ramnagar, Ajmer. Presently posted as Deputy Manager (Finance) RIICO Ltd. Unit, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer. Transferred To RIICO Ltd. Unit, Bhilwara.

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Industries Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Sercretariat, Jaipur.

¶9

The Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment Corporation Ltd., Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director.

¶10

Advisor (A And M), Riico Ltd., Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

¶11

Senior Dy. General Manager, Riico Ltd., Unit Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Harshad Kapoor.

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

¶15

Judgment

¶16

02/04/2019

¶17

This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging judgment dated 15.03.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. The appellant filed writ petition challenging order

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[SAW-572/2019]

¶20

dated 07.03.2019 whereby the appellant has been transferred from the Ajmer Office of Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited (for short ‘the RIICO’) to Bhilwara Office.

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the learned Single Judge has failed to consider the settled principle of law that an employee should ordinarily not be disturbed from the place of posting when he is on the verge of retirement. The appellant is going to retire on 31.03.2020. From the perusal of order dated 07.03.2019 it would be evident that the same is not justified as no joining period has been indicated therein to join the duties at the transferred place. The appellant is suffering from heart problem since last one year and he is undergoing regular medication for the same. The doctor has also suggested angiography and angioplasty to the appellant. It is submitted that wife of the appellant is also working on the post of Lecturer (Chemistry) in Education Department of the State at Model Girls Senior Secondary School, Ajmer and she is also suffering from Cervical Spondylosis and her left hand does not work properly. It is submitted that two other employees who were transferred along with the appellant also represented the respondents and their transfers have been cancelled but no heed was paid to the representation filed by the appellant.

¶22

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, we are in complete agreement with the observations made by the learned Single Judge that transfer is an administrative exigency with an element of public interest to circulate officers across towns/cities and for eschew vested

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

[SAW-572/2019]

¶25

interests being developed. It is for the employer to determine which employee is most suited at which post in which city/town. We see no ground or justification whatsoever to interfere with the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. However, considering that the appellant is at the verge of retirement, we also set him at liberty to file a detailed representation before Respondent No. 2, Managing Director, The Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited, Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur which shall be considered and decided by passing a speaking order within a fortnight by Respondent No. 2.

¶26

With the aforesaid direction, appeal stands disposed of. Stay Application No. 5716/2019 also stands disposed

¶27

of.

¶28

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J

¶29

Manoj/147

Mukesh Verma S/O Devi Lal Verma v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Verma S/O Devi Lal Verma v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Aam Janta Village Saroli Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. C.P. Joshi, President Vs the Registrar, Co-Operative Societies

Anirudh Rajpurohit Son of Shri Bhupendra Rajpurohit Vs Siddharth Mahajan

Shri Mahaveer Prasad Sen Vs Bank of Baroda and Anr.

State of Rajasthan Vs Smt Suresh Kumari W/O Shri Rajendra Kumar Sharma

Smt. Maya Alias Parvati Verma W/O Shri Brijmohan Verma Vs Shri Brijmohan S/O Shri Ganesh Ram Verma