Page No.1 of 3 IN WPS-1310-2020 2026:CGHC:949 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1310 of 2020 Smt. Vandana Dewangan W/o Shri Shashikant Dewangan Aged About 27 Years Working As Assistant Grade - Iii In The Office Of The Joint Director, Health Services, D.K.S. Hospital, Old Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, R/o Shivam Vihar Colony, Mahadevghat Road, Raipura, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, Pin Code 492002, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Health Services, Directorate, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director Health Services Purana Nursing Hospital, D.K.S. Bhawan Parisar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. HAPS Bhatia, Panel Lawyer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 07.01.2026 SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 3 IN WPS-1310-2020 1. Heard. 2. In this matter, this Court in the first round of litigation directed the petitioner to question his transfer order dated 23.08.2019 by filing representation before the concerned respondent authority. However, when the petitioner preferred the said representation, the same stood rejected by the respondent by passing a non-speaking order dt. 14.02.2020 and, against which, this writ petition (second round) has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is bad, illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law. Hence, the same is liable to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned order and prays for dismissal of this petition. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 6. In the present case, a careful perusal of the record would show that since this Court passed interim order dated 27.02.2020, which is still operating after lapse of more than 05 years and impugned order dated 14.02.2020 is a non-speaking order, therefore, the impugned order dated 14.02.2020 (Annexure-P/01) as well as Page No.3 of 3 IN WPS-1310-2020 impugned transfer order dated 23.08.2019, both are hereby quashed. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass fresh transfer order against the petitioner, if there exists any administrative exigency. 7. With aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No cost. s@if Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge