PARIHAR, J. - (1.) AT joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of finally at this stage.
(2.) IN modification of the order dated 19. 2. 2003, the petitioner was transferred from Amer, Jaipur to Satellite Hospital, Sethi Colony, Jaipur vide order dated 3. 3. 2003. Respondent No. 1 was transferred to Community Health Center, Parbatsar (Nagaur) in place of the petitioner. The order dated 3. 3. 2003 was challenged by respondent No. 1 before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur. While disposing of the appeal vide order dated 13. 3. 2003, the Tribunal directed the respondent appellant to make a representation to the concerning authorities within 30 days and the authorities were directed to decide the same within 30 days thereafter. Till then, the operation of transfer order dated 3. 3. 2003 was also stayed to the extent of respondent appellant is concerned. The order dated 13. 3. 2003 is under challenge in the present writ petition. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record as also the impugned order passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur. It has come to the notice of this Court that a strange practice has been adopted by the Tribunal in disposing of the appeals against the orders of transfer thereby creating lot of complications for all the parties concerned. Instead of deciding the appeals on merit, the Tribunal is directing or giving liberty to the appellant therein to file a representation before the concerning authorities in regard to their difficulties and the authorities are also directed to decide the same within a stipulated time. However, till the representations are decided by the authorities concerned, the Tribunal is also staying the operation of the order of transfer only so far as appellants are concerned in the appeal, without considering the effect on the person who has been transferred in place of the appellant. Two persons cannot be posted at the same place on the same post. Either a complete stay has to be granted by the Tribunal so far as both the persons are concerned or simple liberty should have been given to the appellant to make representation. However, without hearing or giving opportunity to the other side a blanket stay as granted by the Tribunal while disposing of the appeal itself, in my opinion, is not justified and approved or even appreciated. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 13. 3. 2003, passed by the Tribunal, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties affected in the appeal. The parties may file proper application for re-hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal along with certified copy of this order. .;