1 / 3 2025:CGHC:22530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4064 of 2025 1 - Rajiv Ahire S/o Shri Kashinath Ahire Aged About 57 Years Presently Working As Deputy Secretary In The Water Resources Department, Govt Of C.G. R/o Kabir Nagar, Tatibandh, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - Chief Secretary, New Mantralaya, New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Secretary General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Secretary Water Resource Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Ravindra Medhekar Deputy Secretary, Skill Development, Technical Education And Employment Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy.G.A. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 05/06/2025 AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.06.06 11:54:42 +0530 2 / 3 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 27/05/2025 (Annexure P-3), by which, the petitioner, who is working as a Deputy Secretary, has been transferred from Water Resource Department to Home Department, Raipur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that initially vide order dated 13/05/2025, the petitioner was transferred from Skill Development, Technical Education and Employment Department to Water Resources Department. Subsequently, after fourteen days, vide order dated 27/05/2025, the petitioner again transferred from Water Resources Department to the Home Department, which is in violation of Rule 6 of the Works (Distribution) Rules issued by the General Administration Department. He further submits that within a short span of time, the petitioner was transferred twice, therefore, the impugned order is arbitrary in manner and is liable to be set aside. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents/State would oppose the aforesaid submission and submits that the order impugned has been passed looking to the administrative exigency and there is no illegality or infirmity in the said order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents. 5. From bare perusal of pleadings and documents, it is manifest that the petitioner has been posted in the post of Deputy Secretary and the order impugned has been passed due to administrative exigency. The order impugned has been passed for smooth 3 / 3 functioning of the work of the department and the Court cannot interfere with such type of orders, which is purely administrative in nature. 6. It is a settled law that transfer is an incident of Service and that who should be transferred where, is for the appropriate authority to decide. It is also well settled that unless the order of transfer is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merits, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Amardeep