[1] Item No. S-23, baweja/- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6119/2010 Pawan Kumar Kalla Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order: 12.07.010 In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jodhpur O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6119/2010 Pawan Kumar Kalla Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date : 12/07/2010. PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI -- Mr. Bheemkant Vyas, for the petitioner. -- 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By way of this petition, filed on 09.07.2010 challenging the impugned transfer order dated 20.06.2010 under Equalization Policy, the petitioner has come with the case that he filed a representation to the District Education Officer, Elementary, Bikaner on 01.07.2010 (Annex-5). referring to the order passed by this Court on 05.07.2010 in batch of writ petitions in S.B.C.W.P. No. 5761/2010 (Bharat Kumar Soni Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) along with 12 other cases, in which while directing the respondents to decide the representations of the teachers who were transferred upon being declared surplus, and to be absorbed at new places directing the petitioners to file representation within one week of the passing of impugned order or order passed by this Court, which ever is earlier; and directing the respondents to decide such representation within two weeks from receipt of such representations, [2] Item No. S-23, baweja/- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6119/2010 Pawan Kumar Kalla Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order: 12.07.010 and for the limited period of said two weeks, status quo was directed to be maintained in the said order. This Court had taken special care for those who had not approached the Court by that time protecting their interests and rights that even if such persons may make, if they have grievances, a representation to the competent authority which was also to be decided by such authority within two weeks without the need of such teachers to approach this Court by way of fresh writ petition and status quo in those cases may be maintained. 3. For ready reference, the relevant paras 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the order passed in SBCWP No. 5761/2010 (supra) on 05.07.2010 are reproduced herein below: 6. However, since the equalization policy recently announced by the State Government, which besides containing certain guidelines, also contains clause for making representation by the concerned teacher in case of any grievance, in the opinion of this Court, these writ petitions can be conveniently disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the representations of the petitioners immediately. If such representation is already filed that may be decided and if not filed, the petitioners are at liberty to either file copy of the writ petition itself, which would be considered as representation or a separate representation may be filed to the competent authority. The representation if filed within one week of passing of the impugned order or order of this Court, which ever is earlier shall be so considered [3] Item No. S-23, baweja/- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6119/2010 Pawan Kumar Kalla Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order: 12.07.010 and decided. 7. The said competent authority is directed to decide such representations of the concerned teachers by speaking order within a period of two weeks from the receipt of such representations. This Court is of the view that in view of the concern for education of the students at large and since a short time is given to the competent authority to decide such representation, till such representation is decided, the status quo with regard to petitioners joining at the transferred place deserves to be maintained. 8. Accordingly it is directed that if in pursuance of the transfer/absorption order, the petitioner concerned has joined at the new place of posting, he will remain there and status quo will be maintained and if the teacher/petitioner concerned has not been relieved from the earlier place of posting and not joined at the new place of posting, then such status quo would be maintained and he will be allowed to continuing to discharge his duties at the earlier place of posting. However, soon upon decision of the representation, such petitioners or teachers would be liable to join at the transferred place, if such representation is rejected by a speaking order by the competent authority. 9. Those who have not approached this Court and have grievance with regard to their transfer, they can also make such representation to the competent authority within one week from today and it is not [4] Item No. S-23, baweja/- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6119/2010 Pawan Kumar Kalla Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order: 12.07.010 required to them to file writ petition for this purpose and such representation will also be decided by the competent authority within two weeks from the receipt thereof by speaking order and aforesaid order of status quo will also apply in their cases too. Sd/- (DR. VINEET KOTHARI), J.” 4. Since this order dated 05.07.2010 is referred to in the representation of the petitioner (Annex-3), this Court is of the opinion that there was no need for the petitioner to approach this Court by way of present writ petition, as his interest and rights were protected vide para 9, quoted above. The present writ petition in the considered opinion of this Court, therefore, is frivolous and unnecessary and same deserves to be dismissed. 5. It is also made clear that now that since direction of this Court in para No. 9, aforesaid binds the authority of the State equally so also binds the litigant approaching this Court, the dates and period given for representation and disposal in that order dated 05.07.2010 would govern the fate of this case also. The writ petition is accordingly summarily dismissed. Cost made easy. Copy of this order be sent to respondents. (DR. VINEET KOTHARI), J. baweja/- S-8