[2025:RJ-JP:24059] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9667/2025 Vinod Kumar Nogia S/o Shri Daya Chand Nogia, Aged About 50 Years, (Incorrectly Mentioned As Shri Ramchand Nogia Due To Typographical Mistake), Working As Agriculture Officer In The Office Of Agriculture Officer (Training Assistant Director, Agriculture (Extension) Jobner, Jaipur Also Resident Of Plot No. B-8, Nehru Nagar, Panipech, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt Of Rajasthan, Govt Secretariat, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Deputy Secretary, Agriculture (Group-I) Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Hansa Gurjar, Now Posted In Place Of The Appellant At (Agriculture Officer (Training) Assistant Director, Agriculture (Extension) Jobner, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. O.P. Mishra For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 01/07/2025 1. Petitioner from the post of Agriculture Officer (Training) Assistant Director was transferred from Jobner to Baran vide order dated 15.01.2025 vice private respondent No.3-Hansa Gurjar. Such transfer order was assailed by the petitioner by way of filing appeal No.627/2025 before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur on the ground that at that point of time, due to fracture in leg on account of an accident, petitioner was unable to [2025:RJ-JP:24059] (2 of 3) [CW-9667/2025] walk. Considering the temporary physical infirmity of petitioner, the Tribunal granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation and simultaneously, stayed his transfer order for a period of two weeks’ until deciding the representation of the petitioner and in such terms, the appeal was disposed of vide order dated 05.02.2025. 2. In furtherance to the liberty extended by the Tribunal, the petitioner submitted a representation before the department. In the representation, apart from taking the ground of suffering from temporary physical infirmity, petitioner also raised other grounds like ailing and aged father, government job of his wife at Jaipur and adversarial circumstances of his children. The representation has been dismissed vide order dated 06.05.2025 (Ann.10) whereagainst the instant writ petition has been filed. 3. This Court finds that in the appeal filed before the Tribunal, petitioner confined his argument to assail the transfer order only on the ground that at that time, he was suffering from temporary physical infirmity due to having fracture in leg, on account of an accident. 4. The other grounds raised by the petitioner in the representation, were not pressed by petitioner, during course of arguments of appeal and for such reason, petitioner succeed to get stay of his transfer order for a period of two weeks. 5. Indisputably, the representation submitted by the petitioner has been dismissed vide order dated 06.05.2025 and the temporary physical infirmity, suffered by the petitioner, has been cured. [2025:RJ-JP:24059] (3 of 3) [CW-9667/2025] 6. This Court is not inclined to entertain any new ground to challenge the transfer order, which were not raised by the petitioner before the Tribunal during the course of hearing of his appeal. Even if, it is assumed that such grounds were raised by the petitioner in the memo of appeal but indeed same were not pressed before the Tribunal during the course of argument, hence petitioner is estopped to raise such grounds before writ court. 7. In such factual backdrop, the writ petition is misconceived and the same is hereby dismissed. 8. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J TN/21