Raj Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

"It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may very graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition, call for the relevant record in the present matter and by issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction: i. Respondents may kindly be directed to transfer the petitioner at GUPS, Block-Ghadsana, Sriganganagar, Rajasthan itself, looking the hardships being faced by the petitioner ii. Respondents may kindly be directed to consider the application form for Intra District Transfer/representation sent by the petitioner sympathetically as the petitioner's mother is suffering from cancer. iii. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the Petitioner."

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working on the post of Teacher Grade III in District Barmer. Counsel further submits that one post of Teacher Grade III is lying vacant in District Sriganganagar therefore, the respondents be directed to transfer him in District Sriganganagar. Counsel further submits that the mother of the petitioner is suffering with cancer disease and no one is there in the family to take care of his mother.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Anr. Vs. Deepak Niranjan Pandit and Anr. reported in (2020) 3 Supreme Court Cases 404 in para Nos. 3 and 4 has held as under:-

"The High Court, in interfering with the order of transfer, has relied on two circumstances. Firstly, the High Court has noted that as a result of the stay on the order of transfer, the headquarters of the respondent will remain at Mumbai and even if he is to be suspended, his headquarters will continue to remain at Mumbai. The second reason, which was weighed with the High Court, is that the spouse of the respondent suffers from a cardiac ailment and is obtaining medical treatment in Mumbai. In our view, neither of these reasons can furnish a valid justification for the High Court to take recourse to its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in passing an order of injunction of this nature. Significantly, the High Court has not even found a prima facie case to the effect that the order of transfer was either mala fide or in breach of law. The High Court could not have dictated to the employer as to where the respondent should be posted during the period of suspension. Individual hardships are matters for the Union of India, as an employer, to take a dispassionate view.

However, we are categorically of the view that the impugned order of the High Court interfering with the order of transfer was in excess of jurisdiction and an improper exercise of judicial power. We are constrained to observe that the impugned order has been passed in breach of the settled principles and precedents which have consistently been enunciated and followed by this Court. The manner in which judicial power has been exercised by the High Court to stall a lawful order of transfer is disquieting. We express our disapproval".

This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed for the reasons; firstly, the petitioner cannot claim to serve at a particular place and can be posted anywhere by the respondents due to administrative exigencies; secondly, in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India and Another Vs Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit (supra), no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

Hence this writ petition is dismissed.