Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11735 (RAJ)

BALVEER PRASAD SHARMA S/O SHRI HAZARI LAL SHARMA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/3793/2025 · 2025-03-19

Sameer Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:12345] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3793/2025 Balveer Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Hazari Lal Sharma, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 132, Kvgss Colony, Karauli (Rajasthan).employee Id-Rjka200226004323. Presently Working On The Post Of Nursing Officer At City Dispensary, Ganesh Gate, Karauli. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Medical And Health (Group-2) Department, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director (Non-Gazetted) And Additional Director (Adminstration), Medical And Health Services, Directoriate, Jaipur. 3. Principal Medical Officer, General Hospital, Karauli District Karauli. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Pathak For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakhar Jain for Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 19/03/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the instant petition is filed assailing the order dated 19.02.2025 passed by learned Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur dismissing the Appeal No.951/2025. Moreover, review petition filed before learned RAT was also dismissed on account of technical reasons. [2025:RJ-JP:12345] (2 of 2) [CW-3793/2025] 2. It is further submitted that the petitioner is approximately aged 50 years and his mother is aged approximately 72 years who is suffering from medical difficulties. 3. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner is facing significant distress and hardship on account of the said transfer, whereby, petitioner is transferred 600 kilometers away from the initial place of posting. 4. Heard and considered. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the fact that transfer is an incidence of service, that no malafides are alleged in the petition other than hardship, that order passed by learned Tribunal is well reasoned and upon an analyses of history of posting of the petitioner, this Court, relying upon the dictum encapsulated in Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 659, is not inclined to interfere with the present petition. 6. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/131