[2026:RJ-JP:20182] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8282/2026 Seema Meena, D/o Shri Pukhraj Meena, Aged About 34 Years, R/ o Shiv Colony, Hindaun City, District Karauli. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Registrar, Revenue Board, Ajmer 3. Deputy Registrar (Administration), Revenue Board, Ajmer 4. District Collector, Karauli 5. Tehsildar, Tehsil Hindaun City, District Karauli ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Pathak For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Choudhary & Ms. Ritu Mishra for Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 13/05/2026 1. It is stated that petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Assistant and was posted as Tehsildar Biswada, wherefrom vide order dated 05.07.2022, the petitioner was transferred to the Office of District Collector, Karauli, considering the physical disabilities suffered by the petitioner. The petitioner joined on 13.07.2022 pursuant to aforesaid transfer order and was continuously working in the office of District Collector, Karauli. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to order dated 18.08.2025 passed in the case of Deepika Katara Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in S.B. CWP [2026:RJ-JP:20182] (2 of 3) [CW-8282/2026] No. 15491/2025, which was filed by a person holding the post of Tehsildar and in which, the petitioner was not a party, nor the transfer order of the petitioner was put to challenge by the aforesaid Deepika Katara (supra), quite abruptly order dated 26.08.2025 was passed by the respondents giving reference of order dated 18.08.2025 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. CWP No. 15491/2025. 3. Learned counsel submits that earlier petitioner was transferred to the office of District Collector, Karauli, considering the pathetic physical condition and disabilities of the petitioner, where she is not able to move at her own and requires assistance of another person, canceling the transfer order after a period of three years and that too by referring an order of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, which has got no relation with the petitioner, is quite arbitrary on the part of the respondents. 4. Learned counsel submits that feeling aggrieved by order dated 26.08.2025, the petitioner filed an Appeal No. 5220/2025 before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur which was disposed of vide order dated 17.12.2025 granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation before the competent authority with further directions to the competent authority to decide the same as per the guidelines of the State Government. Learned counsel further submits that in compliance of order dated 17.12.2025 the petitioner submitted a representation before the Chairman of Board of Revenue, however, the same has not yet been decided. 5. Mr. Manoj Choudhary appeared and accepted notice on behalf of the respondents. [2026:RJ-JP:20182] (3 of 3) [CW-8282/2026] 6. In the light of aforesaid facts when against the order dated 26.08.2025, the petitioner has already approached Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal and where, directions were given to submit a representation to the petitioner before the competent authority and as per the petitioner, she has already submitted representation in compliance of order dated 17.12.2025, this Court finds that the present writ petition filed by the petitioner is totally premature and interference cannot be made at this stage by this Court. However, looking to the fact that representation submitted by the petitioner, five months back has not yet been decided despite direction given by the Tribunal, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition with directions to the respondents to decide the representation, if any, filed by the petitioner against order dated 26.08.2025 within a period of 7 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order considering the physical disabilities of the petitioner by giving a reasoned and a speaking order. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case. 8. Pending application(s) if any, shall also stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J NEERU/28