The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a within-district transfer order for lacking TA/DA stipulation, holding such absence is curable procedural lapse, while directing payment if unpaid and transfer was not voluntary.
Writ petition dismissed; respondents directed to pay TA/DA if not already paid and transfer not voluntary.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JD:11798]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3726/2024
Kailash Chand Bajiya S/o Late Sh. Gopal Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Bajiyo Ki Dhani Post Kitalsar Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Jhajharia through VC For Respondent(s) :
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
11/03/2024
[2024:RJ-JD:11798]
[CW-3726/2024]
(2 of 2)
(DINESH MEHTA),J
16-raksha/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether absence of TA/DA stipulation in a within-district transfer order renders it void and liable to quash under Article 226.
Whether the transfer, being within the same district, warranted interference by this Court under writ jurisdiction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
KAILASH CHAND BAJIYA
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
