1 S. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4914/2007 JAGDISH NAIN V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS. DATE OF ORDER :::: 27/02/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI Mr. H.S.Sidhu, for Petitioner. Mr. Kamlesh Rawat, for Respondents. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30/07/2007, by which the petitioner has been transferred from one place to another, on the instruction of incompetent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Patwari. He is being transferred from one Patwar Mandal to another on the instructions of the Government, though, in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Inder Singh & Others v. State of Rajasthan, 2007 (1) RLW 737, Government is not competent to issue instructions for transfer, thus the order impugned deserves to be quashed, inasmuch as, the order has been passed pursuant to the 2 instructions of the Government as otherwise. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that though some of the Patwaris were transferred pursuant to the instruction of the Government, but those transfers have otherwise been marked in the composite order of transfer by making a mention about the same in Column 5 of the impugned order, indicating it to be a “Raajyadesh”. However, transfer of petitioner was made in the interest of administration by the Collector himself and being an order passed by the Collector himself within his competence, the impugned order should not be interfered with and the judgment in the case of Inder Singh & Others (Supra) has no application. Against the name of petitioner in the order of transfer, it is indicated to be an order passed for administrative reasons as is clear from Column 5 of the order. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. The perusal of the impugned order reveals that the 3 same seems to have been passed by the Collector pursuant to the instructions issued by the Government, but then, a further scrutiny of the order impugned reveals that there are different categories of the transfers, inasmuch, in Column No.5,where it is shown on “Raajyadesh”, the order has been passed on the instructions of the Government. But, there are many other heads indicated in the order, like “Administrative Reasons”, “desires of the employees” etc. Thus, those cases have to be taken separately, inasmuch as, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, the orders passed on the administrative ground are not pursuant to the instructions of the Government, but is an action of the Collector himself, who otherwise was competent to pass such orders, on administrative grounds. In view of the above, the case in hand is not covered by the case of Inder Singh & Others (Supra), inasmuch as, the perusal of the impugned order, in totality, shows that even though there is a mention about the Government instructions therein, but then due to bifurcation of the type of cases, it reveals that many of the transfers have been effected not on the instructions of the Government, but due 4 to the administrative reasons, the case of the petitioner is falling in the category of “administrative decision”, thus the order of transfer in this case is issued by the competent authority. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. However, for the reason that pursuant to the interim order, the petitioner continued at the same place from where he was transferred. Thus, the Collector may look into the matter as to whether the order impugned herein is yet to be given effect or not ? The competent authority would, however, be at liberty to take a proper decision in that regard. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (M. N. BHANDARI), J. scd