Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Om Prakash Kinha vs Raj Civil Service Appel Tri &Ors on 18 November, 2009
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan
Jaipur Bench
**
Civil Writ Petition No.14015/2009
Om Prakash Kinha Versus RCSA Trib. & Ors
Date of Order ::: 18/11/09
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi
Mr. Dharmendra Jain, for petitioner
Mr. Sunil Kr. Singodia, for respondent-5 (caveator) Petitioner & respondent-5 both are members of Rajasthan Tehsildar Service under the control of Board of Revenue. It appears from the record that respondent-5 (Surinder Singh Yadav) on being transferred from the post of Tehsildar Kotkasim (Alwar) to Sub-Registrar Nohar (Hanumangarh) vide order dt.14/10/09 preferred Appeal-1145/2009. However, learned Tribunal after hearing caveator (petitioner, herein) decided appeal vide judgment dt.23/10/09 (which has wrongly been mentioned as 23/11/09) (Ex.5) whereby respondent-5 herein was directed to file representation before competent authority who may also examine the same independently and pendente his representation, operation of order impugned before the Tribunal shall remain stayed.
This order has been assailed by the petitioner in instant petition. Counsel submits that submission having been recorded by learned Tribunal in its judgment impugned herein that respondent-5 had only worked for eight days before his transfer vide order dt.14/10/09 impugned, is factually incorrect and the fact is that he had worked at Kotkasim (Alwar) for sufficient long time; in such circumstances, direction of learned Tribunal in the facts requires interference.
Counsel further submits that on account of order dt.14/10/09 being stayed by learned Tribunal pendente his representation passed in favour of respondent-5 herein in regard to his transfer from Kotkasim (Alwar) to Nohar, petitioner has been transferred from Kotkasim to Bikaner vide order dt.29/10/09 passed in compliance of Tribunal's order dt. 23/10/09. Counsel also submits that reasonable opportunity of hearing was not afforded to him before the Tribunal while passing judgment impugned herein.
Learned Tribunal while disposing of appeal preferred by respondent-5 herein, has recorded only submission made on his behalf but has not recorded its finding on merits and rightly so, since it was for the authority to examine for posting of officer in the interest of administration. At the same time, this Court considers it appropriate that since petitioner is also aggrieved on account of the order by which he was transferred vice respondent-5, he may also be permitted to make representation apprising the authority while taking independent decision in compliance of order of the Tribunal and it is expected from the authority to decide the same independently without being influenced and prejudice by the finding if any recorded by Tribunal in its judgment, impugned herein.
Without examining the matter any further on merits, this Court considers to direct the petitioner to make representation within one week to the competent authority who may also consider representation of petitioner as well while examining the representation submitted by respondent-5 in pursuance of judgment of the Tribunal and may take independent decision while posting petitioner & respondent-5 herein in the interest of administration and exigency of service within two weeks thereafter .
With the observations (supra), writ petition stands disposed of. (Ajay Rastogi), J.
K.Khatri/p.3/ 14015CW09Nov18DsTrnsRep.doc