##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:13348]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5715/2026

Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Harlal Singh, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Nadipura Mohalla, Ward No.43, Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu

(Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner

3. District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

4. Principal, Govt. Sr. Sec. School Birol, Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Garssa Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr. Pooja Sharma Advocate on behalf of Mr. Manoj Sharma Additional

Advocate General.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Judgment

30/03/2026

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging order dated 19.03.2026 passed by Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Tribunal'), whereby, appeal filed by the petitioner against transfer order dated 10.01.02026 and relieving order dated 16.03.2026 has been

dismissed.

2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was holding the post of Lecturer (Geography) at Government Senior Secondary School, Birol, District Jhunjhunu. However, vide order dated 10.01.2026, he was transferred to

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 12:02:59 PM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 06:06:39 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:13348] (2 of 3) [CW-5715/2026] Government Senior Secondary School, Bhaleri, District Churu. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while issuing transfer order, it was ignored by the competent authority that there was general ban over transfers by Department of General Administration, Government of Rajasthan vide order dated 03.11.2025, specifically restraining transfers of employees or the officials who have been

deputed in election duties.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since impugned transfer order dated 10.01.2026 was affected by general ban, therefore, initially, the respondents themselves withdrew that order vide order dated 13.01.2026 specifying that transfer orders ought not have been passed in respect of employees deputed for election duties. Learned counsel submits that grievance of the petitioner is that although transfer order was withdrawn by the respondents themselves, yet in quite arbitrary and illegal

manner, same has been revived vide order dated 12.03.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the issue has not been properly considered by the Tribunal in appeal filed by the petitioner against transfer order and appeal has been dismissed in quite mechanical and causal manner without recording cogent reasons and proper findings over the grounds raised by the

petitioner in the appeal.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

material available on record.

6. It is settled proposition of law that the transfer is an incidence of service and no employee can claim to be posted at a

particular place for all times to come.

7. In the instant case, the petitioner challenged transfer order mainly on the ground that at the time of issuance of transfer

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 12:02:59 PM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 06:06:39 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:13348] (3 of 3) [CW-5715/2026] order, he was already deputed for carrying out election duties and there was general ban for transferring any employee/official who has been deputed in election duties. However, it has also been admitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in order to not disturb the officials who have been deputed for election duties, the respondents themselves withdrew transfer orders with a condition that such transfers orders shall be issued only after getting permission from

Election Department or Appropriate Authority.

8. As the ban imposed in respect of transfers was effective till 07.02.2026, when the ban was over, vide order dated 12.03.2026, the Director, Secondary Educati