[2025:RJ-JP:3524-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 336/2025 Ghanshyam Nepalpuriya S/o Prem Chand, Aged About 59 Years, Resident Of 3309, Chokadi Hajuri Topkhana, Nala Bada Bhomiya Kanhiya Ki Chakki Ke Pass, Ramganj, Jaipur -302 003. Presently Posted As Assistant At Regional Office, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur - 302 001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Labour And Employment, Shram Shakti Bhawan,rafi Marg, New Delhi -110011. 2. Employees State Insurance Corporation, Through Its Director General, Panchdeep Bhawan, Comrade Indrajeet Gupta (Cig) Marg, New Delhi - 110002. 3. Employees State Insurance Corporation through Regional Director, Panchdeep Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur -302001. 4. Deputy Director (I/c), Employees State Insurance Corporation, Regional Office, Panchdeep Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur -302001 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr. R.K. Sharma for Mr. Bhrigu Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma Mr. Bhuvnesh Chander Gaur (OS) present in person HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 24/01/2025 1. This petition is filed challenging the order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short ‘the Tribunal’). [2025:RJ-JP:3524-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-336/2025] 2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was appointed on 01.07.1996 as Class-IV employee with Employees' State Insurance Corporation (for brevity ‘ESIC’). After promotion in the year 2018, the petitioner was working as Upper Division Clerk (UDC). The order dated 09.06.2023 transferring the petitioner from Jaipur to Udaipur was challenged before the Tribunal and the interim protection was granted. During pendency of the litigation before the Tribunal, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Assistant. The Tribunal disposed of the application on 09.07.2024 with direction to the respondents to reconsider case of the petitioner. Vide order dated 27.11.2024, the transfer order was upheld. On dismissal of the Original Application (O.A.), challenging the order dated 27.11.2024 the present petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner raises a limited grievance that when the transfer order was passed, the petitioner was working as UDC and now has been promoted to the post of Assistant and should be transferred on the promoted post. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents on instructions from Mr. Bhuvnesh Chander Gaur (OS), present in Court submits that the petitioner would be transferred on the promoted post to Udaipur. 5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/MR/11