MILAP CHANDRA, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 30. 9. 88 (Anx. 6) passed by the Director, Rajasthan State Seeds Certification Agency (Respondent No. 1) (hereinafter to be called 'the Director) cancelling his previous order dated14. 9. 88 (Anx. 3), transferring the petitioner to Jodhpur and also for quashing the order dated 20. 9. 88 (Anx. 5) by which Rs. 13. 20p spent in postage, have been deducted from his pay. The facts of the case may be summarised thus.
(2.) THE petitioner is an Assistant Seeds Certification Officer of the respondent No, 1. He was transferred from Sheoganj to Suratgarh by order dated Aug. 18, 1988 (Anx. 1 ). He submitted representation (Anx. 2) dated August 22, 1988 to the Director for his transfer to Jodhpur on the ground that his mother has recently died, his father has retired, from the Government service and is not keeping good health, he has to look after his seven younger brothers and sisters at Jodhpur, being the elder brother and Suratgarh is at a far distant place from Jodhpur. THE order (Anx. 1) was modified and the petitioner was transferred to Jodhpur in place of the respondent No. 2 and the latter was transferred to Suratgarh vide order dated 14 9. 88 (Anx 3) THE petitioner reported on duty at Jodhpur on September 17, 1988 and sent his joining report (Anx. 4) to the Director on October 3, 1988, hae received order dated 30. 9. 88 (Anx. 6) of the Director cancelling the previous order dated 14. 9 88 (Anx. 3 ). This order has been challenged on the following two grounds: - (1) THE order dated 14 9. 88 (Anx 3) stood complied with prior to the issuance of the order dated 30. 9. 88 (Anx 6) and their remained nothing for its cancellation; and (2) It is illegal, void and without jurisdiction as it was not made in any public or administrative interest or exigency, it has been made with oblique motive, in abuse and in colourable exercise of powers and malafides at the instance of Shri Madhosingh Diwan, Famine Minister, Government of Raj. (respondent No. 3), without considering the factors on which the petitioner was transferred to Jodhpur by order (Anx. 3) and to accommodate Bhanwar-lal Chaudhary at Sheoganj and P. N. Bohra (respondent No. 2) at Jodhpur. In reply to the show-cause notices, the respondents No. 1 and 2 have filed their return. The respondent No. 3 has not filed any reply. In their replies, respondents No. 1 and 2 have raised two preliminary objections against the maintainability of the writ petition. Firstly, the Rajasthan State Seeds Certification Agency (respondent No. 1) is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and as such it is not amenable to the jurisdiction of the writ court. Secondly, material facts have been concealed and wrong facts have been stated in the writ petition. The petitioner has suppressed the fact that the order (Anx, 3) transferring him to Jodhpur was passed after he approached the Hon'ble Agriculture Minister. He has wrongly stated that the respondent No. 2 stood relieved prior to the order (Anx. 6) dated 30. 9. 88 was passed. The respondent No. 1 has further stated that before consideration of the petitioner's representation (Anx. 2), the Hon'ble Agriculture Minister requested the Director for the transfer of petitioner to Jodhpur in place of respondent No. 2 vide letter (Anx. R 1/1) dated September 8, 1988 of his Personal Secretary. Accordingly, the order dated 14. 9. 88 (Anx. 3) transferring the petitioner to Jodhpur was passed. As the transfer was made at the instance of the petitioner, he was not paid any T. A. and D. A. On 17. 9. 88, the respondent No. 2 was on tour outside Jodhpur and as such charge was not handed over by him to the petitioner when he reported on duty on that day. The order dated September 30, 1988 (Anx. 6) was issued at the instance of the Agriculture Minister vide letter (Anx. Rl/2) dated 23. 9. 88 of his Private Secretary. After the issuance of the order (Anx. 6), the petitioner was not authorised to perform any duty and he also did not discharge any function at Jodhpur. He was simply paid the salary in compliance with the ad-interim stay order of this Court. The allegations made against the respondent No. 3 are baseless and misconceived and he did not play any role in any transfer orders. All orders are valid. The respondent No. 2 has also averred in his reply that he did not stand relieved on 17th September, 1988, he is working at Jodhpur and has received letters from the respondent No. 1 in connection with the official work, even after 17 9. 1988. After the issuance of the order (Anx. 3), he approached the Agriculture Minister and apprised him of his hardship and difficulties, if he is to go from Jodhpur to Suratgarh and, thereafter, order (Anx. 6) was issued, keeping him at Jodhpur.
(3.) IN his rejoinders to the replies, the petitioner admits that he submitted representation to the Agriculture Minister for his transfer to Jodhpur after the order (Anx. 1) was issued. But he has pleaded his ignorance that the order (Anx. 3) was passed at the instance of the Agriculture Minister. He has also stated that no fact has been concealed or mis-stated in the writ petition. The respondent No. 1 is a statutory body. The writ petition is perfectly maintainable against it. The respondent No. 2 is at Jodhpur for more than 4 years and the petitioner never had his posting at Jodhpur during last 11 years. The respondents No. 1 and 2 have also filed their replies to the rejoinders of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner showed us notification dated 30. 3. 78 issued by the Agriculture Department, Government of Rajasthan Jaipur under Sec. 8 (1), Seeds Act, 1966, published in Part IV (Ga) of the Rajasthan Gazette dated April 6, 1978, establishing the respondent No. 1 as a Seeds Certification Agency for the State of Rajasthan. In view of this notification, the learned counsel for the respondents did not press their first preliminary objection. ;