[2025:RJ-JP:13733] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4015/2025 Rajendra Singh Rawat Son Of Shri Mohan Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Residing At Jhunta Ki Guvadi, Balad, Balar (Rural), Beawar, Rajasthan-305901. Presently Working On The Post Of Regional Forest Officer-Ii, (Employee Id Rjbi200609009514), Range Asind, Deputy Conservator Of Forest, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Forest, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest, (Chief Conservator Of Forest), Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Choudhary Mr. Bharat Singh Bhati For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 26/03/2025 The present petition is filed assailing the impugned order dated 03.03.2025 passed by the learned RAT, wherein the appeal preferred by the petitioner-appellant against the impugned transfer order dated 15.01.2025, was dismissed. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned RAT and the material available on record, the following observations are made: 1. That the learned Tribunal, after granting audience to the petitioner herein, by way of a speaking order had dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant-petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:13733] (2 of 2) [CW-4015/2025] 2. That the learned Tribunal has duly considered the vital aspects of the instant matter, for instance, the history of posting of the petitioner employee, administrative exigencies and the fact that transfer is incidence of service had opined the opinion noted therein. For the sake of convenience the relevant extract from the order dated 03.03.2025 is reproduced herein below: “izdj.k ds rF;ksa] vfHkopuksa ,oa vfHkys[k ls ;g Li’V :i ls izdV gksrk gS fd vihykFkhZ {ks=h; ou vf/kdkjh-II in ij jsat vklhan] miou laj{kd] HkhyokM+k esa dk;Zjr gSaA izR;FkhZ foHkkx ds vkns”k fnukad 15-01-2025 ¼vuqyXud&1½ ds }kjk vihykFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k orZeku inLFkkfir LFkku ls jsat ekjokM+ taD”ku] miou laj{kd] ikyh esa iz”kklfud vko”;drk ,oa yksdfgr esa fd;k x;k gSA vihykFkhZ orZeku inLFkkfir LFkku ij fnukad 21-10-2022 ls dk;Zjr gSA fdlh Hkh dkfeZd dks ,d gh LFkku ij inLFkkfir jgus dk dksbZ fof/kd vf/kdkj izkIr ugha gSA ;g fu;ksäk ds foosd ij fuHkZj djrk gS fd og vius fdl dkfeZd dh lsok,a iz”kklfud vko”;drkvksa esa fdl LFkku ij izkIr djsaA gesa izR;FkhZ foHkkx ds vkyksP; vkns”k fnukad 15-01-2025 esa gLr{ksi djus dks dksbZ fof/kd vk/kkj izrhr ugha gksrk gSA” 3. That as per the settled position of law as spelled out in the dictum encapsulated in Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 659 in the matters of transfers, judicial interference is only warranted when the impugned transfer order is hit by certain malafides however, in the matter in hand no such malafides are noted. In light of the above, the present petition is dismissed. Order dated 03.03.2025 is upheld and the petitioner-employee is directed to join the service at the transferred place of posting, pronto. No orders are passed as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J DIKSHA MISHRA /127