RAM PRAKASH CHOYAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: ARUN MONGA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2025-02-04. RAM PRAKASH CHOYAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2025:RJ-JD:7001] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3135/2025 Ram Prakash Choyal S/o Ram Sukh Choyal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Dodiyana, Dist-. Nagour ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur. 2. The Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Jt. Director, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Nagour 4. Sunil Godara, Presently Posted Against The Petitioner At Veterinary Hospital, Nagaur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kunal Upadhyay For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Order (Oral) 04/02/2025 1. Petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks quashing of an order dated 15. 01. 2025, vide which he was transferred from Harsore, Nagaur to Bilara, Jodhpur. There is no post available at the place where petitioner has been transferred. Hence, this petition. 2. Heard. 3.
Transfer being matter of administrative exigency, this Court generally refrains to interfere and treads cautiously, unless it is a case of either patent violation of law or extreme hardship. The case in hand does not seem to be such so as to deserve any [2025:RJ-JD:7001] (2 of 2) [CW-3135/2025] indulgence. Moreover, to transfer or not to transfer an official, is sole discretion of the employer based on the administrative exigencies. Rather, transfer is an integral part of service conditions of a government employee and the same arise out of the administrative exigencies. Such orders are not to be treated as punishment or a promotion. 4. Case in hand does not seem to be such that the petitioner is suffering any extreme hardship of the nature warranting interference by this Court and nor is there any violation of law. 5. Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue his cause before the competent authority.
However, as far as the grievance of the petitioner that there is no post available at the place where he has been transferred is concerned, it is made clear that until petitioner is given joining at the place where post in question is available, no adverse action shall be taken against him and he shall also be entitled to salary for the said period. 5. Disposed of accordingly. 6. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (ARUN MONGA),J 126-AK Chouhan/-
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.