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

2025 Supreme(Raj) 1752

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
ARUN MONGA
Ganraj Bishnoi S/o Kesararam Bishnoi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Manish Patel, Mr. MukeshRajpurohit with Ms. Aditi Sharma, Mr. Kailash Jangid, Mr. S.K. Poonia, Mr. Suresh Kumar Bishnoi, Mr. R.D. Meena, Mr. Harish Purohit, Mr. Rakesh Jakhar, Mr. Ankur Mathur with Ms. DivyaBapna, Mr. Suniel Purohit, Mr. Manish Patel, Mr. Sanjay Raj Pandit, Mr. Ravindra Singh Champawat, Mr. Vikram Singh Rathore, Mr. Lokesh Mathur, Mr. Suresh Khadav, Mr. Hemant Singh Solanki, Mr. Priyank Kawaliya, Mr. Manoj Choudhary for Mr. C.S. Kotwani, Mr. Harshit Bhurani with Ms. Heli Pathak & Mr. Mahipal Rathore, Mr. R.S. Choudhary, Mr. Yashpal Khileree, Mr. Manjeet, Mr. Himanshu Choudhary, Mr. Mukesh Vyas, Mr. J.S. Bhaleria, Mr. Ripudaman Singh, Mr. VikasBijarnia, Mr. Suresh Charan, Mr. N.R. Choudhary, Mr. Devendra Sanwalot, Mr. Vikram Sharma, Mr. Rahul Vyas, Mr. KanishakSinghvi, Mr. Govind Lal, Mr. V.S. Bhawla, Mr. Dinesh Ojha, Mr. Anil BidanHalu, Mr. R.K. Saini, Mr. K.R. Saharan, Mr. Arjun Singh, Mr. Usman Gani, Mr. Puneet Singhvi, Mr. Pawan Singh, Mr. Sikander Khan, Mr. SaranjVij, Mr. Devesh A. Purohit, Mr. Ramesh Kumar.
For the Respondent: Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit, AAG with Mr. Yashraj Singh Kanawat, Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG, Mr. Vaibhav Bang for Mr. N.K. Mehta, Dy.G.C., Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav, Dy.G.C. with Mr. Deepak Vaishnav, Ms. Dolly jaiswal for Mr. MahendraVishnoi, Mr. Samir Shrimali, AGC, Mr. Lalit Pareek, Mr. Lalit Parihar, Mr. Digvijay Singh Sodha, Mr. J.K. Mishra, Mr. Akhilesh Rajpurohit, Mr. Surendra Singh Choudhary, Mr. Ritu Raj Singh Bhati, Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG, Mr. S.R. Paliwal, G.C.

Judgment :

ARUN MONGA, J.

1. Vide instant common order, the entire bunch of petitions as detailed in Appendix ‘A’ is being disposed of as common controversy is involved therein.

2. Petitioners herein, serving in different departments, are assailing the respective orders vide which their services have been put in a category, what is called ‘Awaiting Posting Orders’ (APO). The individual facts of the cases are not relevant for adjudication of the controversy herein, as this Court is to judge upon the legality, as well as, the alleged administrative impropriety of the impugned orders (APO) passed by the respondents.

3. Common grievance of the petitioners being, that by virtue of respective impugned transfer orders of APO, as a bolt from blue, work has been withdrawn from them without assigning/conveying any reasons or if/where conveyed, the same are not tenable. Apart therefrom, under the garb of making them APO, they are being put to humiliation at their work place.

4. At this point, it would be apposite to note the stand taken by respondents in their reply filed in the captioned Writ Petition No. 15366/2024 (petitioner is a Nursing Officer), which being comprehensive one can be broadly t

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top