ORDER : 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order of transfer dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure-6), whereby, the petitioner, who is working as Teacher Level-II in subject Social Studies, has been transferred from Pabubari, Bikaner to Mukam, Nokha. 2. Aggrieved against the transfer the petitioner made a representation to the respondents and filed an appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (‘Tribunal’). 3. The Tribunal vide its ex parte order dated 21.08.2018 required the respondents to decide the representation made by the petitioner with reference to the Circular dated 02.04.1993 issued by the State in relation to the Teachers, who were trained in Scout & Guide Activities. 4. The representation filed by the petitioner pursuant to the direction issued by the Tribunal came to be decided by order dated 11.09.2018 (Annexure-13), wherein, the respondents came to the conclusion that the petitioner has been transferred on account of administrative reasons and the family reasons, which have been indicated by the petitioner do not fall within the parameters for not effecting the transfers. 5. Feeling aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. 6. By order dated 04.10.2018 effect and operation of the order dated 11.09.2018 (Annexure-13) and order of transfer dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure-6) were stayed by this Court. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the action of the respondents in effecting the transfer of the petitioner despite the fact that he was looking after the Scout and Guide Activities that also to a School where such activities are not available is contrary to the Circular dated 23.09.1990 (Annexure- 7), wherein, it has been specifically provided that those working in relation to the Scout and Guide Activities be not transferred so as to ensure that the said activities are conducted properly. 8. Further submissions have been made that though the Tribunal specifically directed the respondents to decide the representation in relation to the Circular, no reference whatsoever has been made to the Circular and, therefore, on that count also the order impugned is bad and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 9. 8. Further submissions have been made that though the Tribunal specifically directed the respondents to decide the representation in relation to the Circular, no reference whatsoever has been made to the Circular and, therefore, on that count also the order impugned is bad and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 9. Initially an application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India was filed by respondent No.4, who was transferred in place of petitioner seeking vacation of the interim order, wherein, it was specifically alleged that the plea raised by the petitioner regarding his being in-charge of the Scout and Guide Activities is factually incorrect, inasmuch as, the petitioner was not in-charge of the said activities at the Pabubari School. Along with the application an information provided to respondent No.4 under Right to Information Act dated 01.11.2018 was appended. 10. The petitioner filed reply to the said application contesting the submissions made in this regard and placed on record certain documents claiming his participation in the Scout and Guide Activities in relation to the present School as well. 11. During the Court of submissions when the contradictory stand of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 came before the Court in relation to Scout and Guide Activities being looked after by the petitioner, the respondent – State was directed to file affidavit in relation to the in-charge of Scout and Guide Activities at Pabubari School. 12. An additional affidavit has been filed by the respondent – State, inter alia, making specific averments based on information supplied by the School (Annexure-R/1) that the activities at the School were being conducted in charge of one Mr. Shiv Shanker Sharma for the period November, 2005 to June, 2018 and from July, 2018 till date the same were being conducted under the charge of Smt. Suman Saini, Senior Teacher and that the petitioner who assumed charge in the School on 01.09.2016 was not having any relation as in-charge of the Scout and Guide Activities. 13. Shiv Shanker Sharma for the period November, 2005 to June, 2018 and from July, 2018 till date the same were being conducted under the charge of Smt. Suman Saini, Senior Teacher and that the petitioner who assumed charge in the School on 01.09.2016 was not having any relation as in-charge of the Scout and Guide Activities. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner in light of the said affidavit attempted to emphasis that the averments made in the additional affidavit were factually incorrect and that the petitioner was in-charge of the Scout and Guide Activities and only with a view to frustrate the claim of the petitioner, the information has been supplied by the Principal of the School based on which the present affidavit has been filed by the respondents and, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted. 14. Learned Additional Advocate General reiterated the submissions that the petitioner has never been in-charge at the Pabubari School in relation to Scout and Guide Activities and, therefore, the entire edifice on which the order passed by the respondents rejecting the petitioner’s representation is sought to be challenged has no basis and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 15. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 16. From the material, which has been placed on record by the petitioner, though it is not in dispute that the petitioner does have experience in relation to the Scout and Guide Activities as apparently he was in-charge of the said activities at the School from where he was transferred to Pabubari School, however, the issue which requires consideration is, as the reliance has been placed on the Circular dated 23.09.1990 (Annexure-07), whether the petitioner is in-charge of the Scout and Guide Activities at Pabubari School or not. 17. The material which has been placed on record by the respondents i.e. respondent No. 4 by way of information supplied under the Right to Information Act and the communication dated 03.12.2019 (Annexure-R/1) from the Principal addressed to the Chief District Education Officer (H.Q.), Bikaner it is apparent that at the Pabubari School the petitioner though may be having experience in Scout and Guide Activities was never given charge of the said activities and the said activities were being conducted by Shri Shiv Shanker Sharma and Smt. Suman Saini as in-charge. 18. The submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner that Smt. Suman Saini is not qualified to be in-charge of the said activities by itself cannot make the petitioner in-charge so as to take advantage of the Circular (Annexure-7) for the purpose of questioning the transfer made vide Annexure-8 to Nokha. 19. In view of the above fact situation, though the respondents while deciding the representation should have adverted to the specific ground taken by the petitioner before the Tribunal, on account of the material which has come on record, the order impugned cannot be questioned only on account of the fact that the issue has not been determined by the respondents. 20. In view of the above discussion, no case for interference is made out in the present writ petition. There is no substance in the writ petition, the same is, therefore, dismissed. 21. All the pending applications and the stay application stand disposed of.