[2026:RJ-JP:13428] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5672/2026 Sulochana Kumari W/o Subash Chandra, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Kailash Nagar, Piprali Road, Nawalgarh Road, Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Government Secretariat Jaipur. 2. The Director Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 3. Raj Sharma, Principal, Govt. Senior Secondary School Gokulpura (213394), Sikar. ----Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Ojla Advocate. For Respondents : Ms. Pooja Sharma Advocate on behalf of Mr. Manoj Sharma Additional Advocate General. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Judgment 30/03/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may most graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and by way of writ order or direction in nature thereof the impugned transfer order dated 22-09-2025 and 09-01-2025 passed by the respondents and order dated 17-03- 2026 passed by the learned Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur may kindly be quashed and set aside by your lordship and respondent is directed to continue the petitioner as Govt. Senior secondary School Gokulpra, Sikar. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner." [2026:RJ-JP:13428] (2 of 6) [CW-5672/2026] 2. It is stated that the petitioner is holding the post of Principal, Senior Secondary School. Vide order dated 22.09.2025 passed by Director, Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner, the petitioner was transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Gokulpura, Sikar to Government Senior Secondary School, Khariya, District Churu. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that feeling aggrieved by order dated 22.09.2025, the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16787/2025 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 04.11.2025 after recording the submission of the petitioner that her husband is also a Government Servant and is posted in District Sikar, therefore, instead of deciding the writ petition on merits, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondent-authority raising all grounds and respondent-authorities were directed to decide the representation within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. It was also directed in order dated 04.11.2025 that in the meanwhile and till disposal of the representation, operation of transfer order/relieve order shall remain stayed. 4. It is stated that in compliance of order dated 04.11.2025 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 02.12.2025 before the Director, Secondary Education raising her grievances against the transfer order. However, the representation was rejected vide order dated 09.01.2026 by giving irrational findings. 5. Learned counsel submits that under these circumstances, against order of rejection of representation dated 09.01.2026, the petitioner approached Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, [2026:RJ-JP:13428] (3 of 6) [CW-5672/2026] Jaipur by way of filing appeal No.780/2026. In that appeal after filing reply by the respondent-department final order was passed on 17.03.2026 by the Tribunal for rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner-appellant. 6. Learned counsel submits that order dated 17.03.2026 passed by the Tribunal suffers from jurisdictional error and material illegality. Learned counsel submits that a finding has been given by the Tribunal that grievance of the petitioner against the transfer order was already raised by her by way of filing writ petition before this Court, which has already been decided on merits and, therefore, on the same ground, no challenge can be raised by the petitioner against the same transfer order. Learned counsel submit that thus, the Tribunal has not properly exercised its jurisdiction and non suited the petitioner on the ground which is totally non existing. 7. Ms. Pooja Sharma, associate of Mr. Manoj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General opposed the writ petition and submitted that Tribunal has also appreciated the appeal filed by the petitioner on merits and has found that as the petitioner was working for almost 3 years at a particular place, hence on that ground only interference was not made by the Tribunal. Thus, there is no error or infirmity in the order dated 17.03.2026 passed by the Tribunal. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. It is a matter of fact that the transfer order dated 22.09.2025 was put to challenge by the petitioner by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16787/2025, which was disposed of vide order dated 04.11.2025. 10. Careful consideration of order dated 04.11.2025 would make it absolutely clear that no point of time the grievance raised by [2026:RJ-JP:13428] (4 of 6) [CW-5672/2026] the petitioner was examined by this Court on merits and the writ petition was disposed of with a simple direction to the petitioner to submit a representation against the transfer order with further directions to the respondents to decide the representation and in the meanwhile and till disposal of representation, operation of transferring/relieving order was stayed. 11. When the representation filed by the petitioner in compliance of order passed by this Court was dismissed vide order dated 09.01.2026, the petitioner approached the Tribunal for assailing order dated 09.01.2026 along with earlier orders. 12. As per Section 2(f) of Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976, transfer order comes within the ambit of 'service matter'. It is well within the rights of Government Servant to file appeal before the Tribunal for ventilating her grievances. The Tribunal is under statutory obligation to consider and decide the appeal strictly in accordance with law and after giving rational findings. 13. In the instant case, this Court finds that the Tribunal abdicated the jurisdiction vested in it by law and has given totally perverse finding by misinterpreting order dated 04.11.2025 passed by this Court. Order dated 04.11.2025 was never passed by this Court after examining the merits/demerits of the grievance raised by the petitioner and simple directions were given for submitting representation before the Competent Authority and the Competent Authority was directed to decide the representation. Such directions cannot be said to be adjudication of the dispute on merits. However, while passing order dated 19.03.2026, the Tribunal has given following findings:- [2026:RJ-JP:13428] (5 of 6) [CW-5672/2026] "orZeku vihy Hkh mlh fo"k; oLrq] leku dkj.kksa ij izLrqr dh x;h gS ftl ij iwoZ esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fu.kZ; fy;k tk pqdk gSA fof/k dk ;g LFkkfir fl)kar gS fd fdlh izdj.k dk ,d ckj l{ke U;k;ky; }kjk xq.k nks"k ds vk/kkj ij fu.kZ; gks tkus ds i'pkr~ mls iqu% mlh vk/kkj ij pqukSrh nsuk U;k;laxr ugha gSA" 14. Above findings reveals that the Tribunal avoided to apply its judicious discretion and jurisdiction only under erroneous assumption that the writ petition filed by the petitioner against the transfer order has already been decided on merits, which is factually incorrect and such finding is also against the record. 15. The Tribunal has further failed to appreciate that the order dated 09.01.2026, whereby the representation submitted by the petitioner in compliance with the order dated 04.11.2025 passed by this Court in earlier writ petition came to be rejected by the respondents, gave rise to a fresh cause of action in favour of the petitioner to challenge the same before appropriate forum in accordance with law. The said right could not have been negated by the Tribunal by erroneously treating the order dated 04.11.2025 as one deciding the dispute on merits. It is significant to note that on the date when the order dated 04.11.2025 was passed, the subsequent order was not even in existence. In such circumstances, the Tribunal could not have declined to adjudicate the appeal on merits and thereby failed to discharge the jurisdiction vested in it by law. 16. In the light of above, this Court deems it just and proper to quash order dated 17.03.2026 and to remand the matter back to Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur by restoring appeal No.780/2026 with further direction to re-consider the appeal on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to both the sides and to decide the appeal afresh within a period of 15 days. It is informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that at present, on [2026:RJ-JP:13428] (6 of 6) [CW-5672/2026] account of lack of forum, the Tribunal has not been constituted. If it is so, the Tribunal shall consider and decide this appeal within a period of 15 days from the date of its first constitution after passing of this order. 17. It is made clear that Tribunal shall not be influenced by any of the findings earlier given in order dated 17.03.2026. 18. It is also made clear that this Court has also not expressed any opinion on merits of the case so far as challenge to transfer order is concerned. 19. Till disposal of the writ petition, operation of transfer order dated 22.09.2025 and relieving order, if any, shall remain stayed and petitioner shall be allowed to continue on the same post and at the same place where she was working prior to passing of impugned orders. 20. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly with above directions. 21. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J MANOJ NARWANI /32