Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.

JUDGMENT :

(SAMEER JAIN, J.)

1. Considering the akin factual narrative and at the request of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the instant batch of petitions are clubbed together, for an efficacious, speedy and convenient adjudication of the lis in hand. With the consent of the learned counsel representing various parties, SBCWP No. 1329/2025 titled as Suryabhan Singh Shekhawat VS. RSRTC and Ors. is taken up as the lead petition. The contentions noted henceforth are endorsed by the counsel representing the parties in the appended Schedule – I. It is made clear that the instant judgment shall be made applicable on mutatis mutandis basis upon the instant batch of petitions.

2. Vide orders dated 05.02.2025 and 06.02.2025 an interim protection to maintain status quo qua the instant dispute was granted, and to attain better perceptivity the CMD and the Executive Director of the concerned department were directed to mark presence in the Court/appear via Video Conferencing to render necessary assistance to learned counsel representing the respondent-department and the Court. The said officials marked presence and assisted the counsel representing the respondents.

3. The lead petition SBCWP No. 1329/2025 (supra) is filed with the following prayers:

“1) By an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent impugned transfer as well as reliving order dated 15/01/2025 (Annexure- 1) may kindly be quashed and set-aside and petitioner may kindly be allowed working on the post of conductor Udaipur Depot.

2) Further his salary may kindly be give as per rule with interest in the interest of justice”

4. The instant petition is filed assailing the impugned transfer order dated 15.01.2025, whereby the respondent-RSRTC had transferred a number of low paid employees, who were working on the post of Conductors or Drivers, sans any rhyme and reason, by a pick and choose method.

CONTENTIONS BY LEARNED COUNSEL REPRESENTING THE PETITIONERS :

5. At the outset, learned counsel representing the petitioners have averred that the respondent-RSRTC is a statutory body therefore, by the virtue of mandate as enumerated under the provisions of Section 45 of the Rajasthan Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1950’), the Corporation had framed the employee service regulation to govern the service condition of its employees as under the name ‘Rajasthan State Road Transport Employees Service Regulations, 1965’ (hereinafter referred to as “the Regulations of 1965’).

6. It was further averred that vide the impugned office order Nos., dated 15.01.2025, approximately 240 low paid employees were transferred, stating that the following ‘Parichalaks’ are transferred, however, neither any explanation was tendered to the employees, nor any modus operandi adopted for ordering the said transfer was brought to the public notice.

7. Nevertheless, whilst adopting a hand-in-glove approach, or whilst being under influence of certain influential and affluent persons, the transfer order(s) qua a number of employees was revoked/cancelled, as reflected by the clarification order dated 15.01.2025, and being aggrieved of the said action of the respondents and the inaction of not considering the grievances of the employees/petitioners, the petitioners were bound to knock the doors of this Court.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have articulated a number of irregularities, that is conducted by the respondent-RSRTC whilst passing the said transfer order, for instance, the impugned transfer order was passed sans considering the fact that the petitioners/employees are low paid employees; that the respondent-RSTRC without considerin