1 2025:CGHC:15405 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2190 of 2025 1 - Dai Singh Dhruw S/o Shri Heera Singh Aged About 44 Years R/o Village - Loharsi, P.S. - Panduka, District - Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Directorate Of Health Services, Department Of Health, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer (Cmho) District - Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Superintendent Cum Civil Surgeon District Hospital At District - Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Sudanshu Upadhaya, Advocate For State : Mr. Risabh Bisen, PL (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 02/04/2025 Heard. 1. By the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner who is working as RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.04.04 11:34:17 +0530 2 Ambulance Driver, is assailing the impugned order dated 09/02/2024 (Annexure-P/1), whereby respondent No. 3, on the basis of a complaint made against the petitioner, has transferred his services from the office of Chief Medical and Health Officer, District Gariyaband to Community Health Centre, Mainpur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transfer made by respondent No.3 on the basis of unanimous complaint, which has no base, is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the law. He would further submits that even the copy of the complaint or due opportunity of hearing has not been provided to the petitioner, as such, the impugned order is not at all sustainable in the eyes of law. He would submit that the petitioner is Class-IV employee and only to harass him, the impugned order has been passed with mala-fide intention. 3. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State would submit that there is a complaint against the petitioner for taking money from the family members of a patient. Even show cause notices dated 07/02/2024 & 21/02/2024 (Annexure-P/3) were issued to the petitioner calling his explanation, but no reply was submitted by him, as such, the transfer order is just and proper and no interference is warranted. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings. 5. The Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India and others v. S.L.. Abbas reported in (1993) 4 SCC 357 has observed as under: “Transfer is an incident of Government Service and who should be transferred where, is for the appropriate authority to decide. It held that unless the order of transfer is vitiated by mala fides or is 3 made in violation of any statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. Similarly, in the case of S.K. Nausad Rahaman v. Union of India reported in (2022) 12 SCC 1 it has been held by the Supreme Court that transfer in an All India Service is an incident of service and that whether, and if so where, an employee should be posted, are the matters which are governed by the exigencies of service, and that an employee has no fundamental right or, for that matter, a vested right to claim a transfer or posting of their choice. The Supreme Court went on to add that executive instructions and administrative directions concerning transfers and postings do not confer an indefeasible right to to claim a transfer or posting. Individual convenience of persons who are employed in the service is subject to the overarching needs of the administration.” 6. It is apparent from the order impugned and from the record that the petitioner was holding the post of Ambulance Driver at the office of Chief Medical and Health Officer, District Gariyaband and he has been transferred to Community Health Centre, Mainpur for smooth functioning that too not at too far distance. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any ground that the order impugned has been passed with mala-fide intention or the same in violation of any statutory provisions. 8. Since, it is a settled law in the matter of Union of India and others (Supra), wherein it has been observed by the Supreme Court that transfer is an incident of Government Service and who should be transferred where, is for the appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated by malafides or is made in violation of 4 statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. Therefore, this Court does not find illegality or infirmity in the order impugned. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Rahul