1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Badri Lal Suthar Vs. The Board of Revenue & Ors. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8110/2008 Date of Order : : 11/11/2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr.Kuldeep Mathur, for the petitioner. Mr.Sanjay Mathur, for the respondent No.3 BY THE COURT: By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order Annexure-4 dated 9th October, 2008 passed by the respondent No.2 by which the respondent No.3 was transferred from the post of Sadar Kanungo, District Udaipur to the post of Nayab Tehsildar, Up-Tehsil Barapal, District Udaipur where the petitioner was working and a note has been appended in the transfer order directing the District Collector 2 to adjust the petitioner against a vacant post at his own level under District Udaipur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. While issuing notice to the respondents, the effect and operation of the order Annexure-4 under challenge dated 9th October, 2008 qua the petitioner was stayed vide order dated 20th October, 2008. Thereafter, by order dated 21st October, 2008, the respondent Board of Revenue cancelled the order transferring the respondent No.3, Shanti Lal Jain, from the post of Sadar Kanungo, District Udaipur to the post of Nayab Tehsildar, Up-Tehsil Barapal, District Udaipur. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondent No.3. Alongwith the reply, the order Annexure- R/3/6 dated 24th October, 2008 passed by the District Collector, Udaipur has been annexed mentioning therein that the transfer of the respondent No.3, Shanti Lal Jain, from the post of Sadar Kanungo, District Udaipur to the post of Nayab Tehsildar, Up-Tehsil Barapal, District Udaipur has been cancelled with immediate effect and the petitioner-Badri Lal Suthar has been directed to continue to work on the post of Nayab Tehsildar, Up-Tehsil Barapal, District Udaipur. In the aforesaid circumstances, since the transfer of the respondent No.3, Shanti Lal Jain, came to be cancelled 3 and the petitioner is allowed to continue on the post of Nayab Tehsildar, Up-Tehsil Barapal, District Udaipur, nothing survives in the writ petition. An application being IA NO.15461/2008 has been filed by the respondent No.3, Shanti Lal Jain, seeking vacation of the interim stay order dated 20th October, 2008. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the writ petition has become infructous since the order transferring Shanti Lal Jain has already been cancelled by order dated 21st October, 2008 and 24th October, 2008 as noticed above and the petitioner has been directed to continue on the post of Nayab Tehsildar, Up-Tehsil Barapal, District Udaipur, therefore, in my view, the above application has also become infructuous and is dismissed. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, if the respondent No.3 feels aggrieved by cancelling the order of his transfer, it will be open for the respondent No.3 to seek an appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum. Stay petition stands disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR), J. NK 4 S.B.CIVIL MISC.STAY APPLICATION NO.14013/2008 IN S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8110/2008 Date of Order : : 11/11/2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr.Kuldeep Mathur, for the petitioner. Mr.Sanjay Mathur, for the respondent No.3 Since the writ petition itself has been dismissed as having become infructuous, the stay petition stands disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR), J. NK