Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
ARUN MONGA
Parman – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
(ARUN MONGA, J.)
1. Grievance of the petitioner stems from an impugned transfer order dated 20.02.2024 (Annex.1), vide which, he was transferred from the Head Office Bhakharwali, Office of Assistant Director Agriculture (Extension), District Hanumangarh to Head Office 6-8 L.L.W., Office of Assistant Director Agriculture (Extension), District Hanumangarh.
2. During the pendency of writ proceedings, a co-ordinate bench of this Court passed an interim order dated 07.03.2024 staying the implementation of the transfer order. Same being apposite, is reproduced herein below:
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is an Agriculture Supervisor, has been sought to be transferred from Head Office Bhakrawali, Office of Assistant Director, Agriculture (Extension), Hanumangarh to Head Office 6-8 LLW, Office of Assistant Director, Agriculture (Extension), Hanumangarh vide order dated 20.02.2024. Counsel submits that the impugned order is in contravention to Rule 8 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities) Rules, 2011 as the Agriculture Commissioner does not have authority/jurisdiction to pass an order of transfer of an employee within the same Pa
The court emphasized that transfer orders must comply with jurisdictional authority and procedural rules, reaffirming that employees do not have an inherent right to remain at a specific location.
Transfer orders must comply with established rules and procedures, and administrative needs cannot override legal requirements.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; courts recognize administrative discretion while maintaining interim protections as necessary.
The court upheld the principle that government employees do not have an absolute right to remain at a specific posting, allowing for necessary administrative transfers.
Court upheld the principle that employees in government service do not have an inherent right to remain in a specific location, allowing for administrative transfers.
Judicial intervention in transfer matters is limited, acknowledging administrative discretion while protecting employee rights against unjust transfers.
The court upheld that while transfers are necessary for administrative efficiency, they must comply with established policies regarding tenure at postings.
The court upheld the administrative authority's right to transfer employees while emphasizing the limited scope of judicial intervention in such matters.
The court upheld the validity of an administrative transfer order, emphasizing that judicial review does not extend to mere dissatisfaction with administrative decisions unless clear illegality is de....
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
