[2025:RJ-JP:27523] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10964/2025 Jalandhar Singh S/o Shri Chiranji Lal, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Salempur, District Dausa (Raj.) Working On The Post Of Agriculture Supervisor At H.q. Mahu Ibrahimpur Additional Carge H.q. Mahu Khas And Kherli Gurjar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Commissioner, Agriculture Department, Pant Krishi Pant Bhawan, C-Scheme, Jaipur. 3. Assistant Director Agriculture (Extension), Hindaun City (Karauli). 4. Election Registration Officer (Sdm), Hindaun, District Karauli. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Kumar Singh Mr. Nitin Jain for Mr. RD Meena For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 23/07/2025 1. The case of petitioner is that he is posted as Agriculture Supervisor at Mahu Ibrahimpur Headquarter and vide order dated 22.05.2025 (Ann.7), he has been given additional charge of Booth Level Officer (BLO) at Sahid Sohansingh Government Senior Secondary School, Danya Bhag, Mahu, Ibrahimpur. 2. The order dated 22.05.2025 was also challenged by the petitioner by way of filing Appeal No.2974/2025 before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal'). The Tribunal clearly observed that the order dated [2025:RJ-JP:27523] (2 of 2) [CW-10964/2025] 22.05.2025 is not a transfer order, but is of assigning additional charge of BLO to petitioner, which is permissible as per Section 13 (b)(2) of the Representation of People Act, 1950. Further, the Tribunal observed that assigning additional charge of BLO to petitioner does not suffer from any mala fides nor there is any breach or violation of any rules and regulations. 3. Counsel for the petitioner argued that earlier, the charge of BLO was assigned to one Shri Mahesh Solanki, Teacher at Shahid Sohan Singh Raumavi, Mahu Ibrahimpur, which has been assigned to petitioner vide order dated 27.02.2025(Ann.3), which is malacious and in violation to the Guidelines. 4. This Court finds that the petitioner has not impleaded Shri Mahesh Solanki as party to this writ petition. Assigning additional charge of BLO does not infringe any of the legal rights of petitioner rather petitioner will obviously get remuneration for his additional work. 5. The Tribunal has already observed that assigning additional charge of BLO to petitioner does not suffer from any mala fides. 6. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant any indulgence in respect of assigning additional charge of BLO to petitioner in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 8. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK JAIMAN/42