SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 1373

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
REKHA BORANA, J.
Surjeet Singh, S/o Shri Jagroop Singh - Petitioner 
Versus 
The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department and Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7602 of 2025
Decided On : 16-04-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Manish Patel
For the Respondents: Mr. N.R. Budania, for applicant.

The court ruled that a transfer order issued by an unauthorized authority during a ban period is invalid, emphasizing the need for proper legal grounds for such transfers.

Headnote:

(A) Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities) Rules, 2011 - Transfer of Panchayat employees - The petitioner challenged the transfer order on grounds of lack of authority, violation of transfer ban, and improper basis for transfer. The court found the transfer order invalid as it was not issued by a competent authority and did not meet legal standards for work arrangement. (Paras 2, 6, 7, 8, 9)

(B) Authority to Transfer - The court reiterated that BDO/VDO lacks independent authority to transfer Panchayat officials without proper consultation and authorization. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was transferred from one Gram Panchayat to another without proper authority during a transfer ban, prompting the challenge. The transfer was purportedly on a work arrangement basis, which the law does not recognize.

Findings of Court:
The transfer order was quashed as it was issued by an unauthorized person and did not comply with legal requirements.

Issues: The main issues included the legality of the transfer order, the authority of the BDO to issue such orders, and the validity of transfers during a ban period.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the transfer order was invalid due to lack of authority and failure to meet legal standards for work arrangements, emphasizing that such transfers can only occur under exceptional circumstances.

Result: The writ petition is allowed, and the transfer order is quashed.

Order :

(REKHA BORANA, J.)

1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of order dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure-5) whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Gram Panchayat 5KK to 39 RB Panchayat Samiti Padampur.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised following three grounds:-

(i) The order impugned has been passed reflecting the transfer to be on work arrangement basis whereas law does not recognise any such term of work arrangement. In support of his submission counsel relied upon the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Dr. Sukumar Kashyap Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7916/2021 (decided on 16.08.2021).

(ii) The order impugned was passed during the ban period i.e. during the period when there was a complete ban by State Government on transfers of Panchayat employees. Counsel submits that before passing of the order impugned, no permission of the State Government/Chief Minister was taken whereas as per the Circular/Order of the Government, even if any transfer order was required to be passed on urgent basis, permission of the State Government/Chief Minister was essential. In support of his submission, counsel relied upon the judgment passed by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Mohan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; (decided on 20.07.2007).

(iii) The order impugned has been passed by the Development Officer whereas as per the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities) Rules, 2011 it is only the District Establishment Committee which is competent to transfer employees of Panchayat Samiti. In support of his submission counsel relied upon the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Kera Ram Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.; S.B. Writ Petition No.2909/2024 (decided on 30.04.2024).

3. An application under Order 1 Rule 10, CPC has been filed on behalf of the concerned Gram Panchayat through its Administrator for impleadment in the writ petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the petitioner is posted at present place since years and as per office order dated 08.09.2014 (Annexure-A/2) of the State Government, no employee of a Panchayat Samiti can be posted at his place of residence. He submits that admittedly, the petitioner is a permanent resident of the Gram Panchayat concerned. Therefore, the transfer order has rightly been passed by the Development Officer.

5. Heard the counsels and perused the record.

6. In Kera Ram’s case (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while dealing with the issue whether a BDO/VDO is authorized to independently transfer Panchayat officials within the Panchayat Samiti, observed and held as under:-

“The CEO/Addl. CEO (DEO & BDO) can issue orders only under State Government’s instructions, as per Rule 289 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. Generally, the power to transfer lies with the Panchayat Samiti, Zila Parishad, or the State Government. When there is disagreement between these bodies and the State, the power is delegated to the CEO/BDO/Vikas Adhikari to execute State Government instructions. But BDOs/VDOs are not authorized independently to transfer Panchayat officials within the Panchayat Samiti. Further, BDOs/VDOs are not authorized to independently order an appointment by transfer of Panchayat officials within the Panchayat Samiti without consulting the Pradhans or Pramukhs of the involved Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad. Thus, the answer to questions 3 and 4 is negative.”

7. In view of the above ratio to the effect that BDO/VDO is not authorized independently to transfer Panchayat officials within the Panchayat Samiti, the order impugned passed by the BDO being not passed by a competent authority, cannot be maintained.

8. Further, evidently the order impugned reflects the same to be passed for work arrangement basis and as observed in Dr. Sukumar Kashyap(supra), posting on work arrangement basis, though not known to law, can be sparingly made to meet out sudden emergent situat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top