B. S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) The instant writ petition has been filed against the order dated 11/12th November, 1997, contained in Annexue-9 to the petition, by which the learned District & Session judge, Rajsamand refused to take petitioner back in the said Judgeship for want of vacancy
(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to his case, succinctly stated, are that petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk in 1975 in the District Judgeship, Udaipur. He claims to have been appointed as Stenographer Gr. II with effect from 2-1-79. He was further promoted as Stenographer Gr. II with effect from 2-1-79. He was further promoted as Stenographer Gr. I in the District Judgeship vide order dated 18-11-89. 1As after re-organisation of district Rajasamand, which was carvedt out LP/EQ/R837/98HVM/SGP 1999 Lab. I. 03 VI /T A from district Udaipur, the petitioner was absorbed in the Disrict Judgeship, Rajsamand. In 1993, petitioner made an application for inter-depart- mental transfer as he wanted to serve as Personal Assistant under the Revenue Department. The Revenue Department considered petitioner's application along with No objection Certificate given by the learned District Judge, Rajsamand (respondent No. 4). He was given posting in the Revenue Department vide order dated 3-3-93 with two conditions, namely, (i) that his lien is continued in the parent department; and (ii) the transfer would be subject to approval from the Board of Revenue or if his services are not required, he would be sent back to his parent department in the next six months. His posting in the Revenue Department was extended from time to time subject to two conditions above-referred and he continued till 1997 and ultimately the order dated 4-11-97 (Annexure.8) was passed repatriating the petitioner to his parent department. By the impugned order dated 11/12th November, 1997, the learned District Judge (respondent No. 4) had informed the Board of Revenue that the petitioner cannot be accommodated therein for want of vacancy on the post of Stenographer Gr. I; moreover , he cannot be given posting as Stenographer Gr. I in the District judgeship as he was working on that post temporarily and the Board of Revenue had absorbed him permanently vide its order dated 29-6-94 Anexure 7)"Petitioner was not allowed to join in the District Judgeship, Rajsamand, hence he preferred the writ petition.
(3.) Heard Mr. Govind Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. R. Singhvi and Mrs. R. R. Kanwar for the respondents.;