VINOD GEHLOT S/O LATE SH. DEV KRISHNA TAILOR vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN

[2026:RJ-JP:42739]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21133/2026
CNR: RJHC021008892026 | URN: CW / 44252U / 2026
Manoj Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Prahlad Gupta, Aged About 49
Years, R/o 35, Pashupatinath Nagar, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, At
Present Posted Senior Ayurved Compunder At Govt. Ayurved
Aushdhalay, Totauli Jaipur And At Present R.u.h.s. Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Deputy Secretary, Ayush
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Additional Director (Administret), Department Of Ayurved,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
connected with
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20114/2026
CNR: RJHC020870782026 | URN: CW / 41990U / 2026
Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Ganpat Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Ward No. 08, Nangaliya Gujarwas, District Jhunjhunu Presently
Working On The Post Of Teacher Level-2 (Social Studies) In
Govt. Upper Primary School Modi, Tehsil Khetri, District
Jhunjhunu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Rural
Development And Panchayari Raj Department, Govt. Of
Rajsthan, Secretraiat, Jaipur.
2. Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. Chief District Education Officer, Smagra Education,
Jhunjhunu.
4. Chief Block Education Officer, Smagra Education, Khetri
District Jhunjhunu.
----Respondents
(Uploaded on 16/10/2026 at 10:33:42 AM)
(Downloaded on 16/10/2026 at 11:10:37 AM)

(2 of 6)
[2026:RJ-JP:42739] [CW-21133/2026]
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19794/2026
CNR: RJHC020886722026 | URN: CW / 41344U / 2026
Vinod Gehlot S/o Late Sh. Dev Krishna Tailor, Aged About 53
Years, R/o 72, Swami Nagar, Tekri Madari, Link Road, Udaipur,
Rajasthan, Presently R/o Opposite D.j. Court, Baran
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Chairman, Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer.
3. The Registrar, Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer.
4. The District Collector, Baran.
5. The District Collector, Udaipur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20174/2026
CNR: RJHC020961972026 | URN: CW / 42089U / 2026
Manoj Kumar Kulhari S/o Jawahar Singh, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Bajor Road, Ward No. 12, Piprali, Sikar,
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Animal
Husbandry Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Rajasthan,
Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Joint Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Sikar.
4. Sanwar Mal Samota, Livestock Inspector, Now Posted
In Place Of The Appellant In Sub- Centre Purohit Ka
Bass, Sikar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Pandey with
(Uploaded on 16/10/2026 at 10:33:42 AM)
(Downloaded on 16/10/2026 at 11:10:37 AM)

(3 of 6)
[2026:RJ-JP:42739] [CW-21133/2026]
Mr. N.S. Gurjar
Mr. Nem Singh Gurjar
Mr. Pankaj Choudhary
Mr. Bhawani Singh
Mr. Ritesh Kumawat
Mr. Ram Pratap Saini
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Chelsi Agarwal
JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
15/10/2026
Reportable
1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in this
batch of writ petitions assailing transfer orders, hence, with the
consent of counsel for the parties, all these writ petitions are
being decided together by this common order.
2. The petitioners have challenged their transfer orders on
various grounds.
3. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record.
4. It is settled proposition of law that transfer is an incidence of
service. No employee has a vested right to remain posted at a
particular place of his choice. It is for the employer or the
competent authority to decide as to where and how its employees
are to be posted, considering the administrative exigencies, public
interest and smooth functioning of the administration.
5. The Government or the competent authority can transfer its
employees anywhere on account of administrative exigencies. No
one can claim immunity from transfer and no one can claim that
he should not be transferred or should be kept at a particular
(Uploaded on 16/10/2026 at 10:33:42 AM)
(Downloaded on 16/10/2026 at 11:10:37 AM)

(4 of 6)
[2026:RJ-JP:42739] [CW-21133/2026]
place of posting till eternity. Long stay at a particular place cannot
be claimed as a matter of right.
6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shilpi Bose & Ors.
Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 1991 SC 532 has held that
transfer orders should not be interfered with normally by Courts
and Tribunals.
7. This Court is constrained to observe that there is a flood of
writ petitions assailing the transfer orders. Government
functioning is paralysed because each and every employee is not
willing to join the transferred place of posting. Maximum number
of employees are approaching this Court and the Rajasthan Civil
Services Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') for getting
their transfer orders stayed and cancelled on one pretext or the
other, thereby bringing the administrative machinery to a
standstill.
8. It is to be noted that the transfer orders of government
employees are ordinarily challenged before the Tribunal and
thereafter before this Court, in case, the appeal submitted by the
employees before the Tribunal are rejected.
9. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India is not to act as a second appellate authority
over the transfer orders passed by the competent authority or by
the Appellate Tribunal.
10. The writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India is extraordinary and discretionary. This Court cannot sit as a
court of appeal over the transfer orders to examine whether the
transfer is convenient or not.
(Uploaded on 16/10/2026 at 10:33:42 AM)
(Downloaded on 16/10/2026 at 11:10:37 AM)

(5 of 6)
[2026:RJ-JP:42739] [CW-21133/2026]
11. The scope of judicial review in transfer matters is very
limited. A transfer order can be assailed in the rarest of rare cases
only on the following grounds:-
(i) If the transfer order has been passed due to
malafide/malice or bias, which is required to be
specifically pleaded and proved with cogent material;
(ii) If there is violation of any statutory
provisions/Rule having statutory force;
(iii) If the transfer order has been passed by an
authority which is not competent to pass such order;
and
(iv) If the extreme case of hardship to life
threatening disease effecting the service conditions, in
rarest of the rare cases.
12. No other ground can be a valid ground for interference.
Personal inconvenience, hardship, long stay, etc. are for the
authorities to consider and not for the Courts.
13. In the present batch of writ petitions, none of the aforesaid
grounds for judicial review are made out.
14. However, to balance the equity and to ensure that genuine
grievances, if any, are not left unaddressed, this Court in the
interest of justice, deems it just and appropriate to grant liberty to
the petitioners to approach the competent authority by way of
filing appropriate representation.
15. Accordingly, all these writ petitions stand disposed of with
the following directions:-
(a) The petitioners are granted liberty to file a
detailed representation before their competent
authority/respondents ventilating their grievances
(Uploaded on 16/10/2026 at 10:33:42 AM)
(Downloaded on 16/10/2026 at 11:10:37 AM)

(6 of 6)
[2026:RJ-JP:42739] [CW-21133/2026]
against their transfer orders, within a period of two
weeks from today; and
(b) on such representations being filed, the
competent authority shall consider and decide the
same expeditiously, as early as possible, preferably
within a period of two weeks thereafter, by passing a
reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.
16. For a period of four weeks from today, all the transfer orders
impugned in these writ petitions shall be kept in abeyance and the
petitioners shall not be compelled to relieve in pursuance thereof.
17. In case, the representations of the petitioners are rejected,
the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed with the matter
strictly in accordance with law and to give effect to the transfer
orders and in case, any such person failed to join the respective
transferred place in spite of rejection of his/her representation,
appropriate disciplinary action would be taken against him/her.
18. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any
opinion on the merits of the case of either party. The authorities
shall decide the representations independently without being
influenced by this order.
19. Stay applications as well as all pending applications, if any,
also stand disposed of.
20. This order shall not be effected upon those who have already
joined their respective place of posting.
21. A copy of this order be placed in each connected file.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
Karan
(Uploaded on 16/10/2026 at 10:33:42 AM)
(Downloaded on 16/10/2026 at 11:10:37 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)