Hon'ble ASOPA, J.—By these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the common order dated 13.2.2009 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur in different appeals whereby the common transfer order dated 27.8.2007 of petitioners Madan Lal, Mangal Ram Yadav, and Tara Chand Kalra, transfer order dated 14.9.2007 of petitioner Smt. Raj Bala Yadav, transfer order dated 5.10.2007 of petitioner Smt.Sukhdev Kaur whereby they have been transferred from upper primary school to primary school inter alia on the ground that their original place of posting wrongly shown as primary school and further without keeping in view the fact that they are B.Ed. and B.S.T.C. which is the academic qualification for appointment of the Teacher Gr. III in primary school under Rule 266 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred as Rules of 1996). 2. Since the Tribunal has decided all the aforesaid appeals by keeping in view the similar nature of the order challenged on common ground, therefore, these writ petitioners are also being conveniently disposed of by this common order. 3. The Tribunal vide its order dated 13.2.2009 by majority of 2:1 dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground that the transfer is an incident of service and the order of transfer them from upper Primary school to primary school is not contrary to the provision of law. The majority members have further held that the said judgment is not with regard to the posting of the teachers of B.Ed. qualification holder in primary school. 4. The minority view has been taken by one of the Member S.S. Rajvi placing reliance of Kailash Chand Harijan & 14 Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan reported in WLC (Raj.) UC (2005) page 138 = RLW 2006(2) Raj. 1700 wherein the Hon'ble High Court after considering the national policy held that there is no logic justification or explanation in respect of adding B.Ed. qualification for appointment to primary school. The said Member has further considered the fact that for teaching in a primary school is different from teaching in upper primary school and, therefore, B.S.T.C. qualification holder is the appropriate person to be appointed as Teacher Gr.III in primary school and the posting of B.Ed. qualification holder in a primary school is illegal and contrary to the provisions of law. qualification holder in a primary school is illegal and contrary to the provisions of law. Counsel for petitioners supported the aforesaid part of judgment and further submits that the impugned order of transfer them is passed without application of mind and would be evidence from the fact that although they were posted in upper primary school but in the impugned order of transfer their posting have been shown in the primary school. In support of the said submission, the petitioners have place reliance in a case of Naresh Koli vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7277/2006 decided on 8.11.2006. 5. The submissions of the counsel for the respondents is that the impugned transfer orders have been issued from one Panchayat Samiti to another Panchayat Samiti by the competent authority and further there is no restriction for positing the B.Ed. degree holder in primary school, therefore, the transfer-orders are not arbitrary. 6. I have considered the aforesaid impugned judgment of the service Tribunal and further gone through the record of the writ petition alongwith the submissions of the parties. 7. The relevant portion of Para No. 23 of Kailash Chand Harijan judgment (supra), Naresh Koli judgment (supra) at Page No. 3 and 4 and Rule 266 of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 are as under:- Relevant portion of Para No. 23 of Kailash Chand Harijan judgment. "We fail to see any logic, justification or explanation in support of adding of B.Ed. qualification for appointment to primary school teachers." Relevant Page No. 3 and 4 of Naresh Koli judgment "The order is not implementable as the petitioner is not working at Nagaur from where she has been shifted. The Divisional Commissioner may be competent to transfer the petitioner and once the transfer order is issued by the Divisional Commissioner, it can not be cancelled by any authority except prescribed by the Govt. The Additional Commissioner was not having the jurisdiction to cancel or modify the transfer order of the petitioner. Respondents have noticed it and have tried to correct it in accordance with law but while doing so the respondents have not taken care to find out as to whether the order passed is implementable. The respondents have not even tried to find out as to whether the petitioner is working in terms of the original order dated 16.12.02. Respondents have noticed it and have tried to correct it in accordance with law but while doing so the respondents have not taken care to find out as to whether the order passed is implementable. The respondents have not even tried to find out as to whether the petitioner is working in terms of the original order dated 16.12.02. The order on the fact of it exhibits non-application of mind and is not implementable." "Rule 266. Academic qualifications.-A recruit must possess minimum qualification as under: (1)............ (2)............ 3. Primary School Teacher (100% by direct recruitment (i) [Senior Secondary (Academic) under new (10+2) scheme or Higher Secondary under old scheme from Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education or equivalent and Secondary School Certificate from Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education or equivalent with 5 subjects, 3 of them shall be Mathematics, English & Hindi (ii) B.S.T.C. Course." 8. In my view, the qualification of B.S.T.C. relating to appointment of primary school teacher is also relevant for the purpose of posting them in primary school, the higher qualification holder i.e. B.Ed. are not to be posted in primary school keeping in view the nature of the studies in primary school and further the Tribunal has also failed to consider the fact of non-application of mind as detailed out hereinabove, therefore, the view taken by the majority members of the Tribunal is contrary to the High Court judgment passed in Kailash Chand Harijan (supra) and Naresh Koli (supra), and the majority view is liable to be quashed and set aside and since the minority view is in accordance with the High Court judgment in Kailash Chand Harijan (supra) and Naresh Koli (supra) the same deserves to be accepted. 9. The majority members of the Tribunal in this case has not correctly interpreted in the judgment, of the Kailash Chand Harijan (supra), therefore, I invoke the extra-ordinary power of this Court under Article 226 as well as supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and declared that the impugned transfers orders of the petitioners who are holding the B.Ed. qualification in primary school is illegal and majority view of the Tribunal is set aside. 10. In view of the above, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned transfer orders dated 27.8.2007, 14.9.2007 and 5.10.2007 are quashed and set aside, so far as the petitioners are concerned.