[2026:RJ-JP:25901] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11526/2026 URN: CW / 25515U / 2026 Sehdev Singh S/o Late Shri Devi Singh, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Charanwas, Badka, Post Danta, Tehsil Danta Ram- garh, District Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Chairman And Managing Director, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Headquarter, Jaipur. 2. The Director (Traffic), Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Parivahan Marg, Headquarter Chomu House, Jaipur. 3. The Managing Director, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Sikar Agar, Central Bus Stand, Sikar, Ra- jasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinayak Kumar Joshi For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 09/07/2026 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a challenge to the order dated 16.06.2026, whereby the petitioner has been given posting after his reinstatement in service as he was under suspension. 2. As per the facts on record, the petitioner, while working as Conductor at RSRTC Depot Jaipur was placed under suspension vide order dated 13.05.2026 on account of some irregularities and the petitioner was asked to join at headquarter RSRTC Depot Dausa. [2026:RJ-JP:25901] (2 of 2) [CW-11526/2026] 3. The petitioner was reinstated in service keeping pending the inquiry and was given posting at Kota Depot vide order dated 16.06.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the petitioner was reinstated after suspension he should have been posted back on the post where he was working prior to his suspension. 5. In a case where an employee is placed under suspension for certain reasons either contemplation of inquiry or arrest in a criminal case, the employee is always required to join at the place designated as headquarter for him. After suspension, the post, which the employee was holding, became vacant and looking to the administrative reasons, someone else may have been posted at that place. After an employee being reinstated by end of suspension, the petitioner cannot claim his posting on the very same place on which he was working prior to his suspension because such post cannot be kept vacant for an indefinite period. 6. By the impugned order dated 16.06.2026, the petitioner has already been given posting after revocation in suspension keeping the inquiry pending. The petitioner cannot claim posting at the very same place where he was working prior to his suspension. Therefore, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J 44/SHRUTI SHARMA