Suresh Meghwal, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) Riyanbadi, Nagaur, known for his integrity, approachability, and strong stance against mining mafias, and good repo with public has suddenly been placed on Awaiting Posting Orders (APO) on 09 August by an order signed by Joint secretary DOPT Govt of Rajasthan. The move has raised eyebrows among locals and administrative observers, prompting questions about the real motive behind the decision.
A Record of Integrity and Public Trust
Meghwal’s career in public service has been marked by transparency, accessibility to citizens, and decisive action against entrenched criminal networks in the sand mining sector. His initiatives reportedly disrupted the operations of the powerful bajri mafia and other illegal activities in the region.
Illegal Bajri Mining – A Burning Issue in Nagaur
Illegal sand mining remains one of Nagaur district’s most pressing problems, often leading to clashes, violence, and institutional pressures. Very recently, tensions flared in the Riyan Bari area when leaseholders and villagers clashed over mining disputes, leaving several injured. The administration had to temporarily halt sand transportation to restore order.
APO Orders – A Question of Procedure
The exact reasons for Surender Meghwal’s APO have not been officially detailed. However, the Rajasthan High Court has clearly ruled that APO orders should only be issued in exceptional circumstances and must be accompanied by written justification from the government—without which the orders could be deemed unlawful. But surprisingly, in the order there is no justification mentioned in order as if not necessary for this particular order. The Rajasthan High Court, specifically referencing Rule 25-A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, has outlined specific situations where an APO may be issued. These include situations like returning from leave, deputation, or training, or when an employee is awaiting a new posting after relinquishing a previous one. The court has made it clear that the conditions listed in Rule 25-A are illustrative, and any other condition justifying an APO must be based on a similar administrative necessity. This means APOs should not be issued lightly or for reasons that are not truly exceptional. A crucial aspect of the court’s ruling is that APOs cannot be used to circumvent the established procedures for disciplinary actions, such as suspensions. The court has also placed limits on the duration of APOs, stating they should not exceed 30 days without a valid justification and approval from the Finance Department. Prolonged APOs without proper cause are considered a misuse of authority.
Political Pressure or Administrative Necessity?
- Was Meghwal’s removal linked to his uncompromising actions against illegal mining interests?
- Were proper procedural requirements, including written justification, met before issuing the APO order?
- Does this decision undermine the state’s commitment to protecting honest officers from political or criminal pressures?
Unless the Rajasthan government discloses a clear and transparent explanation for Meghwal’s APO order, the move risks being perceived as a setback to honest governance—especially when it concerns an officer who has taken a stand against powerful illegal mining lobbies.
