1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4899/2006. (NEELAM BHATI VS. STATE & ORS.) DATE OF ORDER : 19.01.2007. HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. R.S. Rathore for the petitioner/s. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Dy. GA, for the respondent/s. Mr. Rakesh Arora for the respondent no.5. By this petition for writ, a challenge is given to the order dated 9.07.2006 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur accepting the appeal No.2560/2003 titled as Smt. Pushpa Devi Gupta vs. Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Panchayati Raj, Jodhpur. By the order aforesaid, learned Tribunal quashed the order of transfers, whereby the respondent Smt. Pushpa Devi Gupta was transferred from Government Primary School, Shobhasar to Panchayat Samiti, Lunkaransar in district Bikaner vice the petitioner Smt. Neelam Bhati. While giving challenge to the order aforesaid, it is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned dated 19.07.06 is erroneous and suffers from an error apparent on the face of record on the count that the Tribunal interfered with an order of transfer without giving a finding that there was a violation of Statute, the order of transfer is an out come of 2 malafides or is shockingly arbitrary. It is asserted by counsel for the petitioner that no order of transfer can be interfered without having violation of Statute or if the order is not an out come of malafides or is shockingly arbitrary. It is also contended that the learned Tribunal erred while interfering in the matter without hearing the petitioner, who was party necessary to the proceedings being the person effected. Learned counsel for the respondent Smt. Pushpa Devi quite fairly stated in the event this Court remand the matter to the Tribunal for hearing afresh, he shall be having no objection. I have considered the rival contentions. It is true that no order of transfer can be interfered without having violation of Statute or the same is not out come of malafides or is shockingly arbitrary. While setting aside an order of transfer, every judicial/quasi judicial forum is required to give a specific finding to that effect, if it reaches a conclusion that order is illegal. In the instant mater, no such finding is given by the Tribunal. Beside that the present petitioner being the person effected is certainly a party necessary to the proceedings, therefore, the Tribunal also erred while adjudicating 3 the appeal in absence of the present petitioner. As the result to the discussion above, this petition for writ is allowed. The order impugned dated 19.07.2006 is quashed with a direction to the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur to hear and dispose of the appeal afresh after hearing the parties including the present petitioner Smt. Neelam Bhati. Early disposal of the appeal as far as possible within a period of six months by the Tribunal is expected. No order to cost. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/