ARVIND KUMAR SONI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

CW/14005/2023HC Rajasthan2025:RJ-JD:1249525 February 2025Author: ARUN MONGA2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that transfer is a matter of administrative exigency and the court generally exercises restraint in intervening unless there is a flagrant legal violation, malafide, or extreme hardship. The prerogative to transfer an official rests solely with the employer, dictated by administrative necessity. The court found no indication that the petitioner had endured any exceptional hardship warranting judicial interference. Consequently, the court found no grounds for intervention. The challenge to the transfer order was rendered infructuous due to the petitioner having already assumed charge at the transferred location in the absence of any stay order. The court dismissed the writ petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Arvind Kumar Soni, a Senior Tax Assistant, filed a writ petition challenging his transfer order dated July 28, 2023, from Jodhpur to Udaipur, a distance of 250 kms. The petition was filed on September 12, 2023. No interim relief was granted by the court when notices were issued to the respondents. Due to the passage of time and the absence of a stay order, the petitioner has already assumed charge at the transferred location, rendering the challenge to the transfer order infructuous. The court noted that any mitigating circumstances existing at the time of filing the petition would have diminished over time.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the transfer order dated 28.07.2023, transferring the petitioner from Jodhpur to Udaipur, is liable to be quashed on grounds of legal violation, malafide, or extreme hardship. The petitioner contended that the transfer order should be quashed. The revenue, through its submissions, implicitly argued that transfer is a matter of administrative exigency and the court should exercise restraint in interfering with such decisions unless there are flagrant legal violations, malafide intentions, or cases of extreme hardship. The revenue's stance is that the prerogative to transfer lies with the employer and is an inherent aspect of service conditions.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2025:RJ-JD:12495] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14005/2023 Arvind Kumar Soni S/o Shri Shankar Lal Soni, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Chanakya Nagar, Lal Sagar, Mandor, Jodhpur (Raj.) - Relieved As Senior Tax Assistant, O/o Depty Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central Circle) - Ii, Jodhpur (Raj.) For Duty Station - Senior Tax Assistant O/o Ccit Udaipur (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Department, Through Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca), New Central Revenue Building, Janpath, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central Circle), - Ii, Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, Paota C Road, Jodhpur (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Kachhwaha For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral) 25/02/2025

Petitioner, serving as Senior Tax Assistant, seeks quashing of his transfer order dated 28.07.2023 (Annex.1) vide which he was transferred from Jodhpur to Udaipur (250 kms. away).

The present writ petition filed on 12.09.2023 has remained pending following the issuance of notices to respondents. No interim relief was granted by the Coordinate Bench, then seized of the matter at the time of issuing notice. Consequently, by the mere passage of time, the challenge to the transfer orders has been rendered infructuous, as the petitioner, in absence of any stay order, has already assumed charge at the transferred place. (D.B. SAW/706/2025 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Uploaded on 07/03/2025 at 10:38:02 AM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:17:27 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:12495] (2 of 2) [CW-14005/2023]

Furthermore, any mitigating circumstances that may have existed at the time of challenging the transfer order would have waned away over time, thereby obviating the necessity for judicial intervention at this belated juncture.

Be that as it may, it is well established that transfer is a matter of administrative exigency. This Court, as a general principle, exercises restraint in such matters and intervenes only in the instances of flagrant legal violation or malafide or cases of extreme hardship. The prerogative to transfer an official lies solely with the employer, dictated by administrative necessity. Indeed, transfer constitutes an inherent aspect of a government employee’s service conditions and should not be construed as either punitive or promotional.

In the present case, there is no indication that the petitioner has endured any exceptional hardship warranting the Court’s interference.

In light of the foregoing, no grounds for intervention are found. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

All pending applications, if any, are hereby disposed of. (ARUN MONGA),J 493-Rmathur/SP/skm- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (D.B. SAW/706/2025 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Uploaded on 07/03/2025 at 10:38:02 AM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:17:27 PM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →