Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4911 (RAJ)

STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. SHIV NARAYAN SINGH S/O SHRI JOR SINGH

SAW/253/2026 · 2026-03-18

Baljinder Singh Sandhu, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:11643-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 253/2026 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department Govt. Secretariat Jaipur. 2. The Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. The Joint Director Animal Husbandry Department, Dholpur (Raj.) ----Appellants Versus 1. Shiv Narayan Singh S/o Shri Jor Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Devgarh, Post Baretha Chowki, District Dholpur (Raj.). 2. Rahawar Amir S/o Shri Mashrat Khan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Makan No. 4, Patpra Road, Homeopathic Wali Gali, District Dholpur (Raj.). ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG Ms. Pooja Sharma, AAAG Mr. Abhishek Sharma For Respondent(s) : ------ HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 18/03/2026 The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the interim order passed by the Court dated 24.02.2026 whereby the Court observed that an interim order has been passed in the writ petition whereby the respondents were restrained from the terminating services of the appellant. The Court directed that the State shall file an affidavit indicating that they have made the upto date payment of the petitioner after the [2026:RJ-JP:11643-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-253/2026] order dated 18.08.2017, failing which, the Director, Animal Husbandry was asked to remain present in the Court. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the writ petitioner stopped working after 31.08.2018. The learned Single Judge has noticed that after the interim order passed on 18.08.2017, the appellants handed over the work to the placement agency who has refused to allow the writ petitioner to serve beyond 31.08.2018. An application was moved by the concerned writ petitioner before this Court and this Court disposed of the application in view of the fact that the payments were released to the concerned worker. Thus, after 2019, admittedly the petitioners have not been paid. No case for interference is made out against the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the instant special appeal writ is dismissed. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Jatin-183/-