Item No.19. DJ/- SBCWP NO. 7226/2010 Mahendra Kumar Gour Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Order dt: 04th August, 2010 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7226/2010 Mahendra Kumar Gour Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER ::: 04th August, 2010 P R E S E N T HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Pramendra Bohra, for the petitioner. --- 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that while deciding the earlier appeal filed by the petitioner on 06.05.2010, the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal has directed that since in the impugned transfer order the petitioner was not allowed TA and DA as the transfer was made in the administrative exigency and not on the request of the petitioner, therefore, the Tribunal directed that impugned transfer order may be withdrawn and till such representation of the petitioner is decided, the impugned transfer order shall remain stayed. However, thereafter, the respondent concerned authority appears to have passed an order dated 29.06.2010 modifying the impugned transfer order and allowed petitioner TA and DA to the petitioner, and pursuant to the order dated 29.06.2010, the petitioner has been relieved vide order dated 09.07.2010 (Annex-5). Thereafter, again the petitioner approached Item No.19. DJ/- SBCWP NO. 7226/2010 Mahendra Kumar Gour Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Order dt: 04th August, 2010 2/2 the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, however, the appeal was dismissed vide Annex-6 order dated 28.07.2010. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that order dated 29.06.2010 (Annex-4) deserves to be quashed because in pursuance to the directions given by the Tribunal earlier while deciding the appeal of the petitioner, the competent authority was firstly required to withdraw the impugned transfer order. 4. Considering the submissions made at bar, in the opinion of this Court, this contention of the petitioner is misconceived. The competent authority has considered the representation filed by the petitioner and thereafter allowed the TA and DA on account of the transfer of the petitioner, which was made on administrative exigency. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is any breach or non- compliance of the order passed by the learned Tribunal while deciding the earlier appeal of the petitioner. 5. The writ petition being devoid of merit fails and the same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. Copy of this order be sent to the respondents immediately. (DR. VINEET KOTHARI), J. DJ/- 19