Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mohammad Rafiq, Goverdhan Bardhar, JJ.
Amar Singh - Appellants
Vs.
Balmeet Singh and Ors. - Respondents
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1580 of 2018 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18032 of 2018
Decided On : 12-12-2018
Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 2011 – Rule 8(ii) – Respondent promoted from post of Assistant Engineer to of Dy. Director, Agricultural by order he thereafter posted from post of Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, to Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, by order However, subsequently by order, he transferred to Churu. It is this order, which respondent-writ petitioner challenged before learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge relying has held that transfer of respondent-writ petitioner from one District to another cannot be done without satisfying prerequisite condition of obtaining prior consent from the Panchayati Raj Department. learned counsel appearing for State submitted before learned Single Judge that general Circular issued by Government granting relaxation for even inter-District transfer of employees of Panchayati Raj Department without seeking any specific consent of such department –Held, Respondent liability of transfer anywhere in State of Rajasthan and if impugned order of transfer passed in breach of Rule 8, it should also attach to earlier order of transfer whereby respondent posted at Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, we cannot annul earlier order of transfer on assumption of it being suffering from some illegality, Such transfer order has not stayed in appropriate proceedings before Court and therefore this issue could not be determined as question of fact, Considering that appellant is suffering from kidney disease and half of his body sustained paralytic attack, it would be open to him to approach competent employee. It is for them to consider hardship of appellant – Appeal is dismissed. (Para 7, 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
Respondent promoted from post of Assistant Engineer to of Dy. Director, Agricultural by order he thereafter posted from post of Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, to Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, by order However, subsequently by order, he transferred to Churu. It is this order, which respondent-writ petitioner challenged before learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge relying has held that transfer of respondent-writ petitioner from one District to another cannot be done without satisfying prerequisite condition of obtaining prior consent from the Panchayati Raj Department. learned counsel appearing for State submitted before learned Single Judge that general Circular issued by Government granting relaxation for even inter-District transfer of employees of Panchayati Raj Department without seeking any specific consent of such department.
Findings of the court:
Respondent liability of transfer anywhere in State of Rajasthan and if impugned order of transfer passed in breach of Rule 8, it should also attach to earlier order of transfer whereby respondent posted at Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, we cannot annul earlier order of transfer on assumption of it being suffering from some illegality, Such transfer order has not stayed in appropriate proceedings before Court and therefore this issue could not be determined as question of fact, Considering that appellant is suffering from kidney disease and half of his body sustained paralytic attack, it would be open to him to approach competent employee. It is for them to consider hardship of appellant.
Result: Appeal is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Mohammad Rafiq, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by appellant-Amar Singh, the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Development and Soil Conservation, Panchayat Samiti, Rawatsar assailing the order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.11.2018.
2. The learned Single Judge has by the aforesaid order allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent-Balmeet Singh and set aside the order of his transfer dated 31.7.2018.
3. Facts of the case are that respondent-Balmeet Singh was promoted from the post of Assistant Engineer to that of Dy. Director, Agricultural (Engineer) by order dated 11.4.2018. He was thereafter posted from the post of Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, Panchayat Samiti Suratgarh, District Sriganganar to Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department and Soil Conservation, Panchayat Samiti Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh by order dated 1.5.2018. However, subsequently by order dated 31.7.2018, he was transferred from Panchayat Samiti Rawatsar to Churu. It is this order, which the respondent-writ petitioner challenged before the learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge relying on Rule 8(ii) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities) Rules, 2011 has held that the transfer of the respondent-writ petitioner from one District to another cannot be done without satisfying the prerequisite condition of obtaining prior consent from the Panchayati Raj Department. The learned counsel appearing for the State submitted before the learned Single Judge that a general Circular was issued by the Government dated 6.6.2018 granting relaxation for even inter-District transfer of employees of Panchayati Raj Department without seeking any specific consent of such department.
4. The learned Single Judge has however in the impugned judgment has rejected the argument of the State and held that in view of statutory condition contained in Rule 8, the transfer could not be made without the consent as required under Rule 8 and no Circular can override the Rules.
5. We are inclined to concur with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. We are cognizant of the fact that the scope of interference in the matter of transfer by this Court is extremely limited. The Supreme Court in umpteen number of cases has held that an order of transfer of a government servant can be interfered with by the Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India only if the transfer order has been made in violation of any statutory Rules or for the reason of proven malafides. Rule 8 of the Rules of 2011 has categorically provides as under:
(i) the Administration and Establishment Committee of the panchayat Samiti concerned within the same Panchayat Samiti.
(ii) the District Establishment Committee of the Zila Parishad concerned from one Panchayat Samiti to another Panchayat Samiti within the same District.
(iii) the department Concerned from one district to another district with the consent of the Panchayat Raj Department."
6. Rule 8 pertains to the employees of the Panchayati Raj Department. It specifically provides that if an employee is sought to be transferred within the same Panchayat Samiti, it could be made by (i) the Administration and Establishment Committee of the panchayat Samiti concerned within the same Panchayat Samiti, (ii) from one Panchayat Samiti to another Panchayat Samiti within the same District, it could be made by the District Establishment Committee of the Zila Parishad concerned and (iii) from one district to another district with the consent of the Panchayat Raj Department. This being the statutory position, no Circular of the Govt. could have diluted that condition. We therefore do not find any infirmity in the approach taken by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition, particularly when th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
