Veerendr Singh Siradhana, J.:— Referring to the opinion of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Samleta v. State of Rajasthan: SBCWP No. 11862/2017, decided on 14 November, 2017, and various other orders deciding writ applications in the backdrop of opinion in the case of Samleta (supra); learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that transfer of the petitioner(s) effected by the State-respondents is in violation of Rule 8 of the Rajasthan Panchyati Raj Transfer Activities) Rules, 2011.
2. Heard.
3. Issue notice on writ as well as stay application, returnable within four weeks.
4. Counsel would deposit process fee and take out notice for service on respondents.
5. Steps be taken within a week.
6. In addition, counsel is permitted to serve a copy of the writ application along with annexures thereto, in duplicate, in the office of Mr. Sanjeev Singhal, Dy. G. C. and file evidence in the registry.
7. In that event, registry would reflect the name of Me. Sanjeev Singhal, Dy. G. C. as counsel for the State-respondents.
8. In the meantime and till the next date, effect and operation of the impugned order dated 12 July, 2018, qua the petitioner(s), shall remain stayed.
9. List along with SBCWP No. 16558/2018 and 14954/2018.