2025:CGHC:34474 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7880 of 2025 Vikas Tiwari S/o Late Shri H.P Tiwari Aged About 59 Years Occupation Service Presently Posted And Working As Assistant Grade Ii, District Education Officer, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of School Education Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Smt Manju Bala Shukla Assistant Grads Ii, Office Of Block Education Officer Block Bilha District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri Malay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Shreyansh Mehta, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 21.07.2025 1. Challenge in this petition is the order of transfer dated 28.06.2025, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the Office of District Education Officer, District- Bilaspur to the Government Higher Secondary School, Loharshi, Block-Masturi, District-Bilaspur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that against the said transfer order, the petitioner has already made representation which is still pending before the Transfer Committee. As per Clause-8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025, there is in-house remedy for making representation against the transfer order before the Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.07.23 14:04:56 +0530 Wps 7880 of 2025 2 Transfer Committee, who will consider the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law. Clause-8 of the said Transfer Policy is reproduced as below: “8. स्थानांतरण से व्यथिथात शासेकीय से वकी द्वार अपनां स्थानांतरण की थिवरूद्ध अभ्याव दनां की वल स्थानांतरण नांथित की उल्लंघनां होनां पर हो उक्त उल्लंघनां होनां वल की थि की की सेबंध में$ स्पष्ट आधर की सेथा स्थानांतरण आद शा जार होनां की थितथिथा से 15 थिदवसे की भीतर प्रश्नाधनां स्थानांतरण आद शा की प्रथित सेथिहोत शासेनां द्वार गथि-त वरिरष्ठ सेथि0व की सेथिमेंथित की सेयजाकी एव सेथि0व, सेमेंन्य प्रशासेनां थिवभीग की प्रस्तु4त थिकीय जा सेकी ग। सेथिमेंथित द्वार ऐसे प्रकीरण की इसे स्थानांतरण नांथित की प्रकीशा में$ परक्षण कीरनां की पश्चात ” अपनां अनां4शासे सेबंथिधत थिवभीग की प्र थि:त की जाएग। 3. Be that as it may, since in-house remedy has been provided to the employee concerned to raise the grievances before the Transfer Committee against transfer order, this court deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to move fresh representation before the Transfer Committee along with copy of this order within a week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and the Transfer Committee, in turn, shall take a decision on the representation so made by the petitioner in accordance with law in an objective manner and pass a reasoned order on its own merits within a further period of two weeks. Till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. Order of ‘no coercive steps’ is only with respect to transfer of the petitioner, and the same shall not be applicable and affect the departmental proceedings, if any, against the petitioner. 4. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order within a week from today to the said Transfer Committee. 5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma