JUDGMENT :

1. The challenge in this writ petition is to order dated 10.02.2021 (Annx. 12) as also standing order No.11 of 2019 (Annx. 8).

2. By this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner ‘a public spirited person’ challenges the action of the State whereby the members of the Mewar Bhil Corps (For short ‘MBC’) are being transferred to other districts in violation of the statutory provisions contained in Rajasthan Scheduled Area Subordinate, Ministerial and Class-IV Service (Recruitment and Other Service Conditions) Rules, 2014 (For short ‘the Rules of 2014’).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the purpose and object behind constituting MBC has roots in the historical events of importance. He would argue that the constitution of MBC and framing of separate rules to deal with recruitment and service conditions of members of MBC are aimed towards protecting the inhabitants of the tribals in tribal Districts namely Udaipur, Dungarpur, Banswara, Pratapgarh, Chittorgarh, and parts of districts Pali, Sirohi and Rajsamand. His submission is that the rule specifically prohibits the transfer of such members of MBC in another parts of the State and the object behind such provision is that the MBC protects the tribes in the tribal areas.

4. His next argument is that the State until the year 2019 had not disturbed the posting of MBC by sending them in any area other than tribal area, but in the year 2019 a circular No. 11 of 2019 (Annex.8) was issued to open the gates for shifting the members of MBC by transfer and posting to other areas of the State, which is in complete violation of Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014.

5. The alternative submission of learned counsel is that even if it is assumed that some limited power is reserved in the hands of the State to deploy the members of MBC in non-tribal districts, such postings/deployment in the strict sense has to be for specific purpose and for limited period and the same cannot be in the nature of a permanent posting, else it no longer will remain deployment, but will become permanent transfer in non-tribal areas.

6. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that though ordinarily, protection under Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014 is available to members of MBC and they are not transferred and posted outside their cadre in non-tribal areas, but such provision does not restrict the statutory power of the State as conferred in Section 34 of Rajasthan Police Act, 2007 (for short ‘the Act of 2007’) in so far as exigency of service are necessary. He would submit that Section 34 of Act of 2007 confers power on the State to deploy police officers anywhere in the State. The members of MBC are also members of the police force of the State and not outside the same. Therefore, the provision contained in the Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014 would not constitute bar as long as State exercises its power of the Act of 2007 to deploy the police officers.

7. Reliance has been placed on Division Bench’s Judgment of this Court in the case of State & Ors Vs Surendra Khokhar (Kumar) & Ors. (D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 610/2021), decided on 29.11.2021.

8. Heard learned counsel for parties, perused the record and also gone through the relevant rules placed before us.

9. Constitution of MBC is contemplated under Rajasthan Rules 2014. The scheme of the Rule is to constitute services under MBC for tribal areas in the State. The Act provides for provisions with regard to eligibility criteria, appointment, recruitment, reservation probation, confirmation & scales of pay. For ready reference, Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014 reads as under:

“31 Appointment to the service.-Appointment to post(s) in the Service by direct recruitment or by promotion, as the case may be, shall be made by the Appointing Authority on occurrence of substantive vacancies from the candidates selected under rule 25 in order of merit and by promotion from the persons selected under rule 29 of these rules. The persons so appointe