The court emphasized the need for adherence to procedural norms and respect for the autonomy of Panchayati Raj institutions in the context of mass transfers of officials under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act.

Order :

1. This court is yet again being swamped each day with writ petitions by transferees of Panchayat department, alleging that the mass transfers carried out, are in violation of the letter & spirit and the intent of Section 89(8-A) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 coupled with the fact that the transfer guidelines framed by this Court in Kera Ram Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2909/2024, decided on 30.04.2024 have been flagrantly violated, compelling them to approach this Court to seek issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the respective transfer orders.

2. Facts of the individual cases need not be gone into, as what is under challenge herein simpliciter is the manner, procedure, legality and administrative propriety of the transfers/postings. Assertion is that not only it is mechanical exercise of mind, but also colorable exercise of powers taking advantage of the non obstante clause contained in the Section ibid.

3. In fact, instead of adjudicating the controversy all over again, suffice it would be to reproduce the relevant extract of the judgment rendered in Kera Ram ibid, as below:-

“13. The following questions of law are being formulated, which need to be addressed to adjudicate on the merits of impugned orders:-

1.to 5. xxx xxx xxx

6. What is the legislative intent and scope of the State's power under the non-obstante clause in Section 89(8)(A) of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, as amended by Act No. 23/1994 in Rajasthan?

14. to 16 xxx xxx xxx

17. While the State Government has, no doubt, all pervasive powers under the Act, it should refrain from completely taking over the self- governance powers vested in the Panchayats. It is a situation somewhat akin to Article 254 of the Constitution, which envisages that in the event of inconsistency between Parliament and Legislature of State, laws made by Parliament shall prevail on the matters of concurrent list. Likewise, power of transfer of panchayati raj officials herein is concurrently vested with democratically elected panchayati institutions, as well as, State government. It is thus desirable that in keeping with the real intent and spirit of the law, the State Government should only invoke its inherent powers sparingly when there is a conflict with Panchayati Raj elected bodies and avoid exercising these powers in routine Panchayat affairs.

18.to 19 xxx xxx xxx

20. Ultimately, the imperatives of procedural rigor and legal compliance thereof serve as bulwarks against the capricious exercise of transfer authority, ensuring equity and transparency in administrative actions.

In essence, the delicate balance between autonomy, accountability, and effective governance must be maintained, ensuring that decisions are made with due consideration for both procedural norms and administrative exigencies.

21 to 25 xxx xxx xxx

26. Adverting once again to the core issue i.e. the legal intricacies surrounding the constitutional status and functional autonomy of Panchayati Raj institutions in India, established under Part IX of the Indian Constitution through the 73rd Amendment Act, 1992. The involvement of local committees, such as the District Establishment Committee, in transfer decisions examplifies the commitment to decentralized governance and the protection of constitutional principles. Interference of the State Government, where necessary, is no doubt legally permissible as all pervasive powers have been given to it under the Act but at the same time it should not amount to completely taking over the powers of self governance vested with the Panchayats to make the latter as completely redundant.

27. Trite law it is that the non obstante clause essentially connotes that it shall have over riding effect and shall take precedence over any other clause and shall prevail in the event of any conflicting provision. However, here is a case where in the absence of any conflict, powers have been invoked in routine and massive transfer drive