Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Kurda Ram Danodia Vs. State and ors

Kurda Ram Danodia vs State and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Oct 31, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1166688

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kurda Ram Danodia

Respondent

State and ors

Excerpt

.....this court is of the opinion that it is well settled legal position that transfer and posting orders on account of administrative exigencies do not require any interference by the writ court under article 226 of the constitution of india except on very narrow grounds viz. breach of statutory provisions or malafide established against the authority, who has passed the impugned order. however, since the petitioner has submitted his representation to the branch manager of the bank vide his representation dated 22.10.2014 with a copy to the managing director of the respondent- bank, it is expected of the said authority i.e.the managing director of the respondent- bank, to decide the same after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from today. for the period of one month, the effect and operation s.b.civil writ petition no.7668/2014. kurda ram danodia versus state of rajasthan & ors.order dated 31/10/2014 3/3 of the impugned transfer order dated 21.10.2014 (annex.5) qua the present petitioner shall remain stayed. 4. with these observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. no costs. a copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith. (dr. vineet kothari).j. dj/- 3

Full Judgment

S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.7668/2014.

Kurda Ram Danodia versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Order dated 31/10/2014 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.

:: ORDER

:: S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.7668/2014.

Kurda Ram Danodia versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Date of Order :::: 31st October, 2014.

PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.

JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Appearance: Mr.Kurda Ram Danodia, petitioner present in person.

-- BY THE COURT: 1.

The petitioner working as Assistant Executive Officer in Churu Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., has filed the present writ petition against the transfer order transferring him from Sardarsahar, Churu to Salasar, Churu, under a common order passed for 6 persons vide Annex.5 dated 21.10.2014 issued by the second respondent Managing Director, The Churu Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Churu.

The petitioner before filing the present writ petition has already submitted a representation (Annex.6) dated 22.10.2014 to the Branch Manager, The Churu Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Branch- Sardar Sahar, (Churu).however, no heed or response has been paid to the same.

S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.7668/2014.

Kurda Ram Danodia versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Order dated 31/10/2014 2/3 2.

The petitioner, who is present in person, submits that he is going retire in the month of November, 2015, therefore, he may not be transferred to a distant place, which he submits is approximately 110 kilometers from the present place of posting.

He further submits no such enquiry or complaint is pending or contemplated against him and, therefore, the impugned transfer order requires interference by this Court.

3.

Having heard the petitioner, who is present in person, this Court is of the opinion that it is well settled legal position that transfer and posting orders on account of administrative exigencies do not require any interference by the writ court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India except on very narrow grounds viz.

breach of statutory provisions or malafide established against the authority, who has passed the impugned order.

However, since the petitioner has submitted his representation to the Branch Manager of the Bank vide his representation dated 22.10.2014 with a copy to the Managing Director of the respondent- Bank, it is expected of the said authority i.e.the Managing Director of the respondent- Bank, to decide the same after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from today.

For the period of one month, the effect and operation S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.7668/2014.

Kurda Ram Danodia versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Order dated 31/10/2014 3/3 of the impugned transfer order dated 21.10.2014 (Annex.5) qua the present petitioner shall remain stayed.

4.

With these observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

No costs.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith.

(Dr.

VINEET KOTHARI).J.

DJ/- 3

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial