1 2025:CGHC:22968-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 324 of 2025 Ramnath Sharma S/o Late Vishanu Prasad Shrama Aged About 50 Years Posted As Assistant Veterinary Field Officer, Veterinary Dispensary Madku, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Veterinary Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Under Secretary Veterinary Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Director Veterinary Development Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Appellant : Ms. Chetna Sharma, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 11.06.2024 BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.06.12 10:55:41 +0530 2 1. Heard Ms. Chetna Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The appellant has filed this writ appeal against the order dated 22.01.2025 and 25.03.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No. 575/2025, by which the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition filed by the appellant herein and the order dated 25.03.2025 passed in REVP No.65 of 2025, by which the review petition filed by the appellant was dismissed. 3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the appellant is working as Assistant Veterinary Field Officer at Veterinary Dispensary Village - Madku, District – Mungeli. By order dated 08.01.2025 issued by respondent No.2 the appellant has been transferred from Veterinary Dispensary Madku, Mungeli, to Veterinary Dispensary Lokhandi, District – Jashpur. The appellant being aggrieved by the transfer order filed writ petition being WP(S) No. 575/2025 on the ground that the wife of the appellant is working as Lecturer in Takhatpur Block in Bilaspur District, the transfer order is contrary to the transfer policy, the appellant is engaged in 21 Live Stock Census and as per the direction of respondent No.3 the employees engaged in it are not to be allotted any other work till the completion of the census. 4. By order dated 22.01.2025 learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition and directed that the order of transfer passed against 3 the appellant may be kept in abeyance till 10.3.2025 and the petitioner was directed to join his transferred place by 17.3.2025. Thereafter, the appellant filed a review petition being Revp.No. 65/2025, which was dismissed by learned Single Judge, against which this writ appeal has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that learned Single Judge ought to have considered the ground regarding wife of appellant being posted at nearby place. It is settled principle of law that ground of husband and wife being posted at same place needs to be considered and given importance. It is further submitted that learned Single Judge ought to have seen that the Live Stock Census has been extended upto 31.03.2025, so order directing to keep the transfer order in abeyance till 10.03.2025 needed reconsideration as learned Single Judge has ordered to keep the transfer order in abeyance only on the ground that Live Stock Census is being conducted and transfer will affect that Census. It is also submitted that learned Single Judge ought to have also considered the submission made in review petition regarding 19 Assistant Veterinary Field Officers (A.V.F.O.) working against 54 sanctioned posts in Mungeli District and along with appellant, 2 more A.V.F.O have been transferred. So the transfer cannot be treated as in administrative exigency as there itself is shortage of A.V.F.O. in Mungeli District. Learned Single Judge ought to have considered the fact brought up in review petition that no one has been posted at the place of the appellant. As such, 4 both the orders passed by learned Single Judge are bad in law and deserve to be quashed. 6. On the other hand, Mr. S. S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the respondents/State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that learned Single Judge after considering all the aspects of the matter has rightly disposed of the writ petition, which warrants no interference by this Court. 7. We have learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with writ appeal. 8. From the perusal of the impugned order it transpires that the learned Single Judge while disposing off the writ petition filed by the appellant has observed that since the petitioner is engaged in the livestock work, as such the order of his transfer should be kept in abeyance till the census work comes to an end. Furthermore, hardly it will take time upto 28.02.2025, and as such it was directed that the order of transfer passed against the petitioner may be kept in abeyance till 10.03.2025 and the petitioner was directed to join his transferred place by 17.03.2025. Thereafter, the appellant filed review petition, which was dismissed by learned Single Judge. 9. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusing the documents appended with writ petition as also in writ appeal and observation made by learned Single Judge 5 while disposing the writ petition and dismissing the review petition filed by the petitioner/appellant, we are of the considered opinion that learned Single Judge has not committed any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned orders warranting interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu