Supreme Court Protects Rank And Pay Of Rajasthan Principal District Judge Who Was Transferred 7 Times In 4 Years

The Supreme Court protected the substantive rank, pay, and administrative status of a Rajasthan Principal District Judge who has faced seven transfers since 2021 and has now been posted as the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi granted the relief to Dinesh Kumar Gupta, a Principal District Judge in Rajasthan, who had approached the Court last year alleging that he was being targeted and repeatedly transferred in violation of the applicable transfer policy.

Pursuant to the Supreme Court's order requesting the HC to consider his representation, he had been posted as Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, Jaipur Metropolitan-cum-Industrial Tribunal. The petitioner, however, expressed apprehension that the posting was not commensurate with his rank, status, and stature as a Principal District Judge.

Addressing this concern, the Court directed in the order –

“(i) The substantive rank of the petitioner shall continue to be that of Principal District Judge.

(ii) The petitioner shall be entitled to all the allowances admissible to a Principal District Judge, even during his posting as the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal.

(iii) The petitioner shall not report to any junior and/or a District Judge. His administrative control shall directly be with the Administrative/Portfolio Judge of the Sessions Division within which the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, where the petitioner has been posted, is located.”

The application was disposed of after the Rajasthan High Court accepted these directions.

Background

The order follows the Supreme Court's earlier decision dated December 19, 2025, passed in a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging his frequent transfers. In the writ petition, the petitioner had assailed the transfer order dated December 02, 2025, by which he was shifted from Beawar to Jalore. He had stated that this was his seventh transfer since 2021, with none completing the minimum tenure, and alleged that the repeated transfers were arbitrary, mala fide, and punitive.

He had contended that the transfers violated the Transfer Policy for the Officers of Rajasthan Judicial Service, notified in 2013, which mandates a minimum tenure of two years, protection for officers nearing retirement, consideration of medical grounds, and spousal posting norms.

He had alleged that his serious medical condition requiring advanced treatment in Jaipur or Mumbai was ignored, that officers nearing retirement were not to be disturbed, and that there was no administrative exigency as the transfer was a one-to-one swap.

The petitioner had also alleged a pattern of hostile action, referring to repeated adverse remarks made against him by the Rajasthan High Court during 2020–2021, which were later expunged by the Supreme Court.

Invoking Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, he had argued that the transfers violated his rights to equality, equal opportunity in service, dignity, and health, and that transfers were being used as a punitive tool.

On December 19, 2025, the Supreme Court observed that the petitioner's earlier postings as a Member of the State Legal Services Authority and as Director (Law) in the Jaipur Development Authority appeared to be based on his service record and could not be termed punitive.

The petitioner had stated that he had about 10 months of service left before superannuation, that he required continuous medical treatment at Jaipur, and that his wife, a government employee in Jaipur was also nearing retirement.

Thus, the Supreme Court had requested the Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court to consider the petitioner's representation sympathetically. Pursuant to this order, the petitioner was posted as Presiding Officer of the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal.

News portal Scroll had reported that the transfer of Dinesh Kumar Gupta in July last year from Commercial Court Jaipur to District Court Beawar happened on the same day he gave a ruling against an Adani-group company.

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh along with Advocates Varun Singh and Mudit Gupta (AOR) represented the petitioner.

Case no. – Miscellaneous Application No.79/2026 in W.P.(C) No.1264/2025

Case Title – Dinesh Kumar Gupta v. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur & Anr.

Click Here To Read/Download Order