Rajasthan High Court
CW/19217/2022 of MARY PALMER W/O SH. VIJAY MACKWAN Vs SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICE on 22 December 2022
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19217/2022 Mary Palmer W/o Sh. Vijay Mackwan, Aged About 55 Years, Nursing Officer (On The Post Of Nurse Grade-II), R/o Quarter No. -1, CHC Indergarh, Distt. Bundi, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. Secretary, Department of
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19217/2022
Mary Palmer W/o Sh. Vijay Mackwan, Aged About 55 Years, NursingOfficer (On The Post Of Nurse Grade-II), R/o Quarter No. -1, CHCIndergarh, Distt. Bundi, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Secretary, Department of Medical And Health Service,Secretariat, JaipurSecretariat, Jaipur
2. The Director (Non Gazetted), Medical And Health Service,Jaipur, RajasthanJaipur, Rajasthan
3. The Medical Officer In-Charge, CHC Indergarh, District Bundi,RajasthanRajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dev Krishna PurohitFor Respondent(s):
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
22/12/2022
1. Petitioner, a Nursing Officer, has challenged the order dated6.12.2022 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services AppellateTribunal (hereafter `the Tribunal’) whereby the Tribunal hasdismissed the appeal of petitioner and affirmed her transfer videorder dated 21.11.2022 from CHC Indragarh, Bundi to JLN MedicalCollege Ajmer.
2. Heard counsel for petitioner and from perusal of the record,it transpired that the petitioner was working at CHC Indragarh,Bundi and she has been transferred to JLN Medical College Ajmer,where she was posted from 24-2-2020. Petitioner challenged thetransfer order on the ground that she has been transferred just toharass her and for this purpose on basis of false complaint shewas put to face enquiry proceeding and was suspended.
Page 1 of 2
(2 of 2)
[CW-19217/2022]
Subsistence allowance also was paid after many efforts for thesame. The Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal also has notconsidered entire facts and grounds of the petitioner’s appeal anddismissed the same. Hence, this writ petition.
3. It is trite law that transfer order is not required to beinterfered with by a Court, unless the same is tainted withmalafides or in flagrant violation of transfer policy. Further, it is acase where the petitioner has faced enquiry proceedings, whichdoes not entitle her to make allegations. The Tribunal has notcommitted any illegality or jurisdictional error in dismissing theappeal, and same does not warrant any interference.
4. The Apex Court in the case of Union of India VsDeepak Niranjan Nath Pandit [(2020) 3 SCC 404], has held thatinterference with a transfer order is in excess of jurisdiction andimproper exercise of judicial power, when there is no malafide norany breach of law in passing the transfer order, therefore, thisCourt, while exercising its writ jurisdiction, is not inclined tointerfere with the transfer order, which has been affirmed by theTribunal on merits observing that the transfer order has beenpassed in administrative exigency and does not suffer from anymala fides or illegality.
5. The writ petition is without any force and the same isaccordingly dismissed.
6. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…