- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners.
(2.) THESE writ petitions involve same facts and law, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed off finally by this common order. These writ petitions are directed against common order dated 04.07.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby original applications filed by the petitioners against their transfer and moment orders have been dismissed. From the order passed by the Tribunal, it is clear that it is second round of litigation. The petitioners earlier approached the Tribunal against their verbal order of transfer. They were granted liberty to make representation to respondents and till then, interim order was passed in their favour. Thereafter, the petitioners submitted representations, which were rejected and thereafter, they filed the present original applications, which have been dismissed vide order dated 04.07.2012, which is under challenge in these writ petitions. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that no consent was taken from the petitioners before passing their transfer and moment orders. It is also submitted that Tribunal has not considered the case of the petitioners properly, therefore, order of Tribunal and transfer/moment orders of petitioners be set aside. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners in the light of reasons assigned by the Tribunal for dismissing their original applications.
(3.) THERE is no dispute that present posts of the petitioners are transferable posts. The Tribunal has observed that the petitioners are holding their present posts for last about nine years; their representations have been considered by the respondents and by speaking and detailed order, the same have been dismissed. Relevant Paras 2 and 3 of the order passed by the respondents have also been quoted in the impugned order. No statutory rule has been pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners to show that petitioners' consent was necessary before their transfer. In these circumstances, we find no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal, so as to interfere with the same. In view of above discussion, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions and the same are, accordingly, dismissed in limine. Stay Application Nos. 8643/2012, 8737/2012 and 8738/2012 are also dismissed. Registry is directed to place a copy of this order on record in connected matters. ;