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.

Ram Kishore Vs. State of Rajasthan

Ram Kishore vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Oct 16, 1986
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/767734

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 High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 957 of 1979
Subject
Service

Case Summary

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

RAJASTHAN MUNICIPAL SUBORDINATE and MINISTRIAL SERVICE RULES, 1963 - Rule 38--Transfer of an employee from one Municipality to another Municipality--Powers of Director--Held, Director is empowered to transfer an incumbent from one Municipality to another Municipality in efficiency of administration--It is not necess...

Key legal issue
Service

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ram Kishore

Advocate Mr. Singhvi

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Cases Referred
Mohan Lal Jain v. State of Rajasthan
Reported In
1986WLN(UC)112

Excerpt

rajasthan municipal subordinate and ministrial service rules, 1963 - rule 38--transfer of an employee from one municipality to another municipality--powers of director--held, director is empowered to transfer an incumbent from one municipality to another municipality in efficiency of administration--it is not necessary to mention it in transfer order;order accordingly - ashok kumar mathur, j.1. petitioner perferred this writ petition challenging the order transfer annex-3 dated 30-6-1979 from the municipal board, ganga shahar to the municipal board, khertal. he has challenged the validity of the rules but his case is squarely covered by the decision of this court in mohan lal jain v. state of rajasthan 1979 rlw 441. in this case the validity of the sections 304, 297(1) of the rajasthan municipalities act, 1959 and rule 38 of the rajasthan municipal sub-ordinate and ministrial services rules, 1963 has been upheld. therefore, this case is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment.2. mr. singhvi appearing for the petitioner submits that the transfer order does not fulfil the conditions laid down in rule 38 of the aforesaid rules. i have gone through the rule 38 which only enables the director, local bodies to transfer the incumbent from one municipality to another when it is considered necessary in the efficiency of the services. it is not the requirement of the rule that it should find mention in the transfer order. this is only a guiding factor to the director whom the power has been conferred under sub rule (2) of the rule 38 to transfer the incumbent from one municipality to another in efficiency of administration.3. since the petitioner is continuing on the present post, the director may consider the advisability of transferring him now.

Full Judgment

Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.

1. Petitioner perferred this writ petition challenging the order transfer Annex-3 dated 30-6-1979 from the Municipal Board, Ganga Shahar to the Municipal Board, Khertal. He has challenged the validity of the Rules but his case is squarely covered by the decision of this court in Mohan Lal Jain v. State of Rajasthan 1979 RLW 441. In this case the validity of the Sections 304, 297(1) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 and Rule 38 of the Rajasthan Municipal Sub-ordinate and Ministrial Services Rules, 1963 has been upheld. Therefore, this case is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment.

2. Mr. Singhvi appearing for the petitioner submits that the transfer order does not fulfil the conditions laid down in Rule 38 of the aforesaid Rules. I have gone through the rule 38 which only enables the Director, Local Bodies to transfer the incumbent from one Municipality to another when it is considered necessary in the efficiency of the services. It is not the requirement of the rule that it should find mention in the transfer order. This is only a guiding factor to the Director whom the power has been conferred under sub Rule (2) of the Rule 38 to transfer the incumbent from one Municipality to another in efficiency of administration.

3. Since the petitioner is continuing on the present post, the Director may consider the advisability of transferring him now.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial