IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH SB Civil Writ Petition No. 13513/2009 Tej Pal Singh Vs. The Rajasthan Civil Services Appelate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur & ors. DATE OF ORDER : 17/11/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. RS Bhadauria, for petitioner. ***
The petitioner, who is holding substantive post of Teacher Grade III, was promoted on the post of Head Master in his own pay scale vide order Anx. 1 for a period of six months or till regularly selected persons by DPC are made available and posted in the institution at Budhawas (Rajgarh) and before the petitioner could join, it appears that the order of postings was further modified by the Government vide Anx. 4 and the petitioner was posted in Haripura (Rajgarh). This was assailed by the petitioner before the Service Appellate Tribunal, however, the appeal was rejected on 20/10/2009.
Counsel further submits that the petitioner was posted at his own request on promotion and option was called for by the department itself and in these circumstances, subsequent order passed by the respondents for his further posting under order impugned dt. 29/09/2009 is arbitrary and requires interference by this Court.
The petitioner has been posted on promotion and even under the order impugned dt. 29/09/2009 certain modifications were made in regard to postings. As per petitioner’s own submission the posting order is within the distance of 60 kilometers. It is not the case where the service conditions of the petitioner are affected and it is always for the respondent authority to post an employee/officer on promotion in the interest of administration wherever his services are required. No malice has been alleged against the authority who has passed the order impugned or violation of any statutory rule, if any.
The learned Tribunal has also examined the material on record and found no justification to interfere in the matter. This Court finds no manifest error in the order passed by the learned Tribunal which may call for interference.
Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, stands dismissed.
[AJAY RASTOGI], J.
Raghu-13513-CW-2009-final.doc