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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 15863

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
SUDESH BANSAL, BHUWAN GOYAL
BISRAM SANSI S/O SH. SURJYA SANSI – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI – Respondent
CW / 19390 / 2025



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19390/2025

Bisram Sansi S/o Sh. Surjya Sansi, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Village Alipura, Post Chhan, District Tonk, Raj-304001, Working As Junior Secretariat Assistant (JSA) In NVS Bhilwara. (Group

C)

Email-bisramsansi@gmail.com

M-9929321513

----Petitioner

Versus

1. The Commissioner Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, B-15,

Institutional Area, Sector 62, Noida, Gautam Budh

Nagar, Uttar Pradesh 201309

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti,

Regional Office, Sector -5, Shanti Nagar, Shipra Path, Mansarovar, Behind Metro Mass Hospital, Jaipur,

Rajasthan- 302020

3. The Assistant Commisioner (Est-I), Navodaya Vidyalaya

Samiti, Regional Office, Sector -5, Shanti Nagar, Shipra Path, Mansarovar, Behind Metro Mass Hospital, Jaipur,

Rajasthan- 302020

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kavita Bhati

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Krishna Verma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

Order

18/12/2025

1. Heard respective counsel for both the parties and perused

the record.

2. Petitioner has impugned the final order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur dismissing his OA No.662/2025 and denying to quash the order of transfer dated 23.05.2025 whereby and whereunder the petitioner, as

Junior Secretariat Assistant (JSA i.e. Store Keeper) has been transferred from JNV, Chhan, Tonk to Bhilwara.

3. Contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned transfer of petitioner violates the policy of transfer as petitioner falls in category of “Due for Retirement” and employees of such category are immune to transfer within two succeeding years as on cut off date of transfer.

4. Learned counsel has drew attention of this Court to clause (p) of provision 3 of the transfer policy which reads as under:-

"(p) Employees"Due for Retirement"within two succeeding years as on cut-off date of the transfer year, hitherto termed as DFR, shall be allowed to continue at their present station till retirement unless such employee requests for transfer."

5. In respect of determining the cut off date of transfer, clause

4.3 of the policy has been pressed which stipulates as under:-

"(4.3) Cut-Off Date of Transfer Drive:

The cut-off date for all kinds of eligibility shall ordinarily be 31st of July of the year of transfer drive. However, vacancy arising out due to retirement of the incumbent shall be counted as on 30th of June of the transfer year. Decision regarding cut-off date is intended to facilitate administrative execution of transfer drive, movement of employees to their allotted station and streamlining the academic requirement. Therefore, change in cut-off date, if any due to administrative exigency, shall be notified through its guidelines well before launch of transfer drive."

6. Submission of counsel for the petitioner is that the cut off date for the impugned transfer order dated 23.05.2025 shall be treated as 31.07.2025 for the year 2025 and since his retirement is due on 31.07.2027, the impugned transfer order violates the policy of transfer.

7. In addition, submission of counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was transferred as displacement transfer and vice petitioner, another employee Shri Rajendra Nagar was transferred but since Rajendra Nagar did not opt to join, and he has been accommodated by the respondents at another place, Baran, hence presently, the post of JSA at JNV, Chhan, Tonk is still lying vacant, after transfer of petitioner, therefrom.

8. On the basis of above contentions, the prayer of counsel for the petitioner is that the order passed by the Tribunal stands vitiated on above counts and warrants interference and petitioner, though has joined at the transferred place, may be allowed to rejoin at his original place at the JNV,Chhan, Tonk.

9. Per contra, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents while supporting the impugned order submits that initially petitioner was transferred vide order dated 07.04.

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