SBCWP NO.998/02. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.998/2002. Nirmala Kumari Pandey Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of order:- January 20, 2009. HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Mahesh Sharma for the petitioner. Shri Aklesh Jain, Deputy Government Counsel. ***** BY THE COURT :- This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to direct the respondents to disburse the salary to the petitioner from July, 2001 onwards and to grant her the the benefit of selection scale and arrears of salary on recommendations of 5th Pay Commission from September 1998 to August, 1999 and be further directed not to harass and victimise her and not to stop the payments of her salary along with other benefits. 2) Shri Mahesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner within 20 days of joining of service with the respondents, was arbitrarily transferred vide order dated 22/12/1998 which order was challenged by her before the Rajasthan SBCWP NO.998/02. 2 Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur. The Tribunal vide order dated 20/5/1999 quashed the order of transfer. Respondents taking annoyance with this fact arbitrarily stop her making payment of salary and she was not even granted the benefits of pay fixation as per the revised pay scale. 3) Respondents in reply to the writ petition submitted that in fact petitioner was transferred from Sub Centre Laxmipura, P.H.C. Pipalda to Sub Centre Kaithuda in compliance of the order of Joint Director Medical and Health Services Kota Zone dated 11/6/2001 and the petitioner was relieved to join at Sub Centre Kaithuda. However, she absented from duty since 19/7/2001 and has not joined anywhere and in these facts, she cannot claim the relief prayed for. Reply to the writ petition was filed as far as back 10/2/2009. No rejoinder thereof has been filed. 4) Learned counsel for the petitioner however would insist that averment made in reply to the writ petition may not be believed because respondents have not produced any order of transfer or relieving order to substantiate the contents thereof. Such a plea therefore cannot be accepted. 5) Having regard to the facts of the case however, petitioner is set at liberty to make a representation to the respondents who will consider the decide the same within a period of three months from the date such representation is made. If any SBCWP NO.998/02. 3 grievance of the petitioner still survives after disposal of such representation, petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil