Shrawan Singh Shekhawat vs State Of Rajasthan

Arun Monga, J

Assailed herein is an order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.2) vide which petitioner has been transferred from Neema Ka Thana to Rajsamand at a distance of 400 kms.

The petitioner, after due selection process, was initially appointed as Mines Foreman-II. Thereafter, he was transferred to Neem Ka Thana vide order dated 22.02.2024. He was promoted to the post of Mines Foreman-I, vide order dated 07.03.2024. Vide impugned order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.2), he has been transferred to Rajsamand. Hence, this petition is preferred on the ground that he has been transferred within a short span of 11 months.

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents on service of advance copy of the writ petition.

At the very outset, counsel for the respondents submit that it is not a case of routine transfer but owing to the promotion of the petitioner, he has to be necessarily given the benefit thereof by placing his services on the promotional post. They submit that at the current place of posting, there is no post of Mine Foreman-I, though after promotion petitioner was allowed to continue serving in the same district. They submit that on the vacancy becoming available at Rajsamand on the promotional post, petitioner is being transferred on the higher post in terms of his promotion order.

Having heard the counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that no doubt petitioner has been put to certain hardship owing to the fact that he has been transferred about 400 km. away from the current place of posting, but such are the vagaries of government service of working in a territorially as large a State as Rajasthan that one has to necessarily accept those as fait accompli. The petitioner has since been promoted, he deserves to be given the benefits of the same by posting him at a place wherever promotional post is available. Therefore, I see nothing wrong with the same.

In view of the above, no grounds to interfere.

Dismissed.

However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file his representation in future as and when a nearby vacancy is available, subject of course to administrative exigency and requirement of work on the post in question.

All pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.