##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:15202]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6741/2026

Shrinarayan Sharma S/o Shri Bhojraj Sharma, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 8, Rana Pratap Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Principal, Mahatma Gandhi Govt. School, Machwa, Jaipur.

4. Vijeta Sain, Lecturer At Mahatma Gandhi Govt. School Machwa, Jaipur. ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.S. Bhawla For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh Bhati for

Mr. SS Rathore, AAG

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

02/04/2026

1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following

prayers:

“i) By an appropriate writ, order and direction, the Impugned order dated 10.1.2026 & relieving order dated 18.3.2026 and order dated 12.3.2026 (Annex. 1, 2 & 7) are passed by the respondents may kindly

be quashed and set aside ii) By an appropriate writ, order and direction, the respondents be directed to continue the petitioner on the post of lecturer in Mahatma Govt. School, Machwa

District Jaipur.

iii) Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.”

(Uploaded on 03/04/2026 at 12:13:26 PM)

(Downloaded on 04/04/2026 at 08:45:55 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15202] (2 of 4) [CW-6741/2026] 2. Brief facts of the case, in nutshell, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Teacher Grade-III in the year 2015, thereafter promoted/appointed as Lecturer, and is presently posted at Mahatma Gandhi Government School, Machwa, District Jaipur since 02.09.2022, discharging her duties satisfactorily. The petitioner has challenged the impugned transfer order dated 10.01.2026, whereby she was transferred to Government Senior Secondary School, Shahpura, District Bhilwara without any administrative exigency and merely to accommodate Respondent No. 4, and in pursuance thereof, she was relieved on 18.03.2026. It is submitted that the petitioner was assigned SIR (Special Intensive Revision) duties vide order dated 07.11.2025 issued by the SDM, Jhotwara, and as per the Election Commission’s guidelines dated 27.10.2025, no official engaged in election- related work can be transferred without prior approval of the Commission. Despite being engaged in such duties, Respondent No. 2 issued the transfer order dated 10.01.2026 in violation of the said guidelines. Subsequently, the said transfer order was withdrawn on 13.01.2026; however, in an arbitrary manner, the withdrawal order itself was withdrawn on 12.03.2026, thereby reviving the original transfer order, pursuant to which the petitioner was relieved on 14.03.2026. It is contended that once the transfer order dated 10.01.2026 had already been withdrawn, the same could not have been revived by merely withdrawing the withdrawal order, rendering the impugned action illegal and

unsustainable in law.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents, while the ban in operation, had transferred the petitioner from Jaipur to

(Uploaded on 03/04/2026 at 12:13:26 PM)

(Downloaded on 04/04/2026 at 08:45:55 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15202] (3 of 4) [CW-6741/2026] Bhilwara. He submits that the period of ban came into effect up-till 07.02.2026; wherein, petitioner has been transferred vide order dated 10.01.2026 (Annex.P/1). He also submits that respondents realized their mistake and vide order dated 13.01.2026 (Annex.P/ 6), withdrew the aforesaid transfer order. Thereafter, the respondents, vide order dated 12.03.2026 (Annex.P/7), withdrawn the order dated 13.01.2026; meaning thereby, the said transfer order was given effect. He further submits that once the transfer order has been withdrawn by the respondents, the same cannot be given effect later on by withdrawing the order dated

13.01.2026.

4. Counsel for the petitioner, thus,