D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1425/2010 (Union of India & Others Versus Central Administrative Tribunal & Another) Date of Order :: 8th February, 2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. B.N. Sandu, counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners preferred this writ petition against the order dated 5th February, 2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, by which the Original Application filed by the respondent no.2 Bachhu Lal Meena has been allowed holding that delinquent employee should not be transferred during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the relevant material on record. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners and having gone through the order dated 5.2.2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, we find no illegality in the impugned order. -2- The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not want to challenge the impugned order on merits, but it should not be treated as a precedent. A bare perusal of the order impugned reveals that direction is given with regard to respondent no.2 only, thus cannot be treated as a precedent in other cases. Consequently, this writ petition fails being devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. (K.S. RATHORE),J. DK/- D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 194/2010 In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1425/2010 (Union of India & Others Versus Central Administrative Tribunal & Another) Date of Order :: 8th February, 2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. B.N. Sandu, counsel for the petitioners. Consequent upon the dismissal of writ petition, the stay application, filed with the writ petition, does not survive and the same also stands dismissed accordingly. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. (K.S. RATHORE),J. DK/-