HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4684/2026 Udai Raj Meena ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan & Others.

----Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Pathak Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr. S.M. Sharma Advocate on behalf of Mr. Manoj Sharma Additional Advocate General.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

13/03/2026 Issue notice to respondents.

Mr. S.M. Sharma, associate of Mr. Manoj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General appears and takes notice on behalf of the respondents. Name of Mr. Manoj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General be shown in the Cause List as counsel for the respondents.

It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that vide order dated 23.11.2025, the petitioner was transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Raseri, Bharatpur to Government senior Secondary School, Madalda, Banswara and no other person has been posted at Bharatpur vice the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that wife of the petitioner Smt. Muneshee Bai Meena is also a government servant and holding the post of Teacher Grade-II in respondent-department. At present she is posted at Government Upper Primary School, Nagla Arjun, Bayana, District Bharatpur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is consistent policy of the State Government that in case, husband and wife both are in government service, then efforts should be made to post them at the nearest place, but in the instant case, the petitioner has been transferred at a distant place in another district. Learned counsel submits that although the petitioner approached Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') against transfer order, yet the Tribunal has not properly considered the facts of the case, material on record and the law prevalent at the relevant time and vide order dated 06.03.2026 dismissed the appeal in a quite mechanical manner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and his wife both are ready to submit a joint application for transferring both of them in the same district, without pointing out a particular district and in order to avoid any inconvenience, they ought to be posted in the same district.

In the light of above submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, operation of order dated 23.11.2025 shall remain stayed qua the petitioner and he shall be permitted to continue at the same place where he was posted prior to issuance of order dated 23.11.2025.

It is made clear that this interim order shall not come in the way of the respondents in case they deem it appropriate to pass a separate order for transferring the petitioner as well as his wife both in the same district irrespective of choice of any district by the petitioner or his wife.

List this matter after four weeks.

In the meantime, reply be also filed by the respondents.

(ANAND SHARMA),J MANOJ NARWANI /47