CWP 9104/2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH SB Civil Writ Petition No. 9104/2009 Meghsingh Meena Versus. The State of Rajasthan & ors. DATE OF ORDER : 09/11/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mrs. Pradeep Lata Mathur, for petitioner. Petitioner, who is serving as Teacher Grade III, after serving for almost five years, was transferred from Hindaun to Karauli vide order dated 27/06/2008 (Anx.5). However, when he did not join and complied with the order, a stern action was taken against him and was placed under suspension for disobeying the order of the authority vide order dated 27/10/2008. However, after submitting his reply/representation, the authority examined and pending departmental enquiry he was reinstated in service vide order dated 03/07/2009 and consequential order was passed granting him permission to now join at the place of posting vide order dated 10/07/2009. It appears that despite opportunity afforded, the petitioner has failed to carry out the order Anx. 5 dt. 27/06/2008 in pursuance to which he was transferred. However, the appeal CWP 9104/2009 [2] was preferred by him which has also been rejected by the learned Tribunal on 22/10/2008. Counsel for petitioner submits that the administrative reasons, which have been taken note of by the respondents, has not been disclosed and the results of the past five years are upto the mark and in such circumstances, there was no administrative reason available with the respondents in passing the order impugned. As per the petitioners' own saying, he was posted in an institution at Hindaun on 20/01/2003 and after working for almost five years, he has been transferred vide order impugned dated 27/06/2008 (Anx.5). The submissions made by counsel for petitioner of administrative reasons which the authority took note of in passing of the order impugned is without substance. If a person has been allowed to continue for last five years, the authority can certainly take a decision to transfer the incumbent in the interest of administration or in exigencies of services if arises and the petitioner could not claim any CWP 9104/2009 [3] lien against the post held by him to continue for a sufficient long time. It is not a case where the petitioner has imputed any malice against the authority who has passed the order impugned or violation of any statutory rules if any in absence whereof the action of the authority cannot be said to be arbitrary which may require interference of this Court. Apart from it, in the instant case, when the petitioner disobeyed the order in resuming duty in pursuance of the order impugned dt. 27/06/2008, ample opportunity was afforded and even when the appeal was dismissed and he failed to join, he was placed under suspension that too was revoked, there appears to be a reason that he may now join and carried out the order impugned by which he was transferred but the fact remains that even after revocation of the order of suspension and opportunity afforded, he failed to join and for reasons one or the other he certainly disobeyed the order of the authority. Consequently, this Court finds no substance in the writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. CWP 9104/2009 [4] However, the respondents will be free to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law if he has not joined so far, for the alleged disobedience committed by him in not complying with the order of transfer dt. 27/06/2008. A copy of this order shall be sent to the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan for necessary action. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. Raghu/9104--CW-2009--final.doc