[2025:RJ-JP:27496] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10843/2025 Papeeta Meena D/o Shri Ramniwas Meena, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Kedara, Post Charnat, District Tonk. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur Through its Managing Director, Parivahan Bhawan, Headquarter Jaipur. 2. 3. Executive Director (Traffic), Headquarter, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Parivahan Bhawan, Headquarter Jaipur Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Bundi Depot, Bundi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 23/07/2025 1. Instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as second round of litigation on behest of the petitioner, to assail her transfer order, as Conductor, from Bundi Depot to Banswara Depot in the list dated 15.01.2025. 2. Undisputedly, petitioner assailed her transfer order by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1370/2025, which came to be decided along with other writ petitions vide common order dated 17.02.2025. The transfer order of petitioner was stayed for a period of three months with liberty to submit a representation. The RSRTC preferred Special Appeal thereagainst and the Division [2025:RJ-JP:27496] (2 of 3) [CW-10843/2025] Bench vide order dated 04.07.2025, sustained the liberty to submit representation but vacated the stay order on implementation of transfer order for a period of three months. 3. It appears that in furtherance to such liberty, petitioner submitted a representation dated 23.05.2025 (Annexure-10), raising family adversarial circumstances that her husband is unemployed, her parents are aged, she has two minor children and she is sick etc. Such representation has been considered by the respondents on merits and has been rejected vide order dated 08.07.2025 (Annexure-11), whereagainst instant writ petition has been filed. 4. Undisputedly, petitioner was posted at Bundi Depot way back on 05.03.2014 and she has been transferred after near about 10 years in the list dated 15.01.2025 to Banswara Depot. As per the transfer policy of RSRTC, an employee cannot be permitted to retain at a place for more than five years. 5. The contention of counsel for petitioner is that in the order dated 08.07.2025, RSRTC has considered that petitioner has been penalized in the five charge-sheets issued to her, hence, the transfer order is virtually a punitive transfer order. 6. This Court is not convinced with the contention of counsel for petitioner. The transfer order of petitioner has been issued as per the transfer policy and a bare perusal of list, reveals that no step treatment to petitioner has been given. Mere reference of the conduct of petitioner to receive five charge-sheets in the order of rejecting her representation, does not categorize her transfer order to be punitive. The transfer order has been issued in the [2025:RJ-JP:27496] (3 of 3) [CW-10843/2025] backdrop of fact that petitioner remained posted at Bundi Depot since 05.03.2014. The impugned transfer order has not been questioned on the ground of mala fides or being in violation of the transfer policy. 7. The Apex Court in case of Union of India Vs. Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit [(2020) 3 SCC 404], has held that interference with transfer order is in excess of jurisdiction and improper exercise of judicial power, when there is no mala fide nor any breach of law in passing the transfer order. 8. Therefore, this Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, is not inclined to interfere with the transfer order and the writ petition is hereby dismissed. 9. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /41