1 2025:CGHC:35143 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7991 of 2023 Anand Dhruw S/o Late Sukhram Dhruw Aged About 57 Years At Present Working And Posted As Executive Engineering At Rural Engineering Services Division, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector And District Election Officer Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 3 - Ravishankar Nag Posted Executive Engineering At Chhattisgarh Gramin Sadak Vikas Abhikaran, Office At Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. M. Asha, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 22.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Asha, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondents No.1 and 2. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition with the following relief(s):- YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.07.26 11:26:49 +0530 2 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned transfer order dated 29-09-2023 (Annexure P-1) so far as the transfer of petitioner is concerned. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work at present place of posting i.e. Rural Engineering Services Division, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.). 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court be further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.” 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the transfer order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the respondents. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.10.2023, has been granted an order of stay in favour of the petitioner in respect of the transfer order dated 29.09.2023. In view of the said interim protection, the petitioner is presently continuing at his original place of posting. It is contended that the petitioner’s grievance is that the impugned transfer order dated 29.09.2023 is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the applicable transfer policy, particularly when the petitioner had only recently been transferred on account of promotion by the earlier order dated 30.12.2022 and had joined at the present place of posting on 01.02.2023. It is further 3 contended that there exists no valid administrative reason to disturb the petitioner within such a short span of time, especially considering that the transfer was solely to accommodate respondent No. 3 at the petitioner’s place of posting. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the impugned transfer order dated 29.09.2023 be set aside and the interim relief granted by this Hon’ble Court may be confirmed by way of final relief. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the writ petition. 6. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed an interim order in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 06.10.2023, which reads as follows:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the promotion and transfer order dated 30.12.2022, the petitioner has been transferred from Distt. Bemetara to Distt. Mahasamund and joined his duties on 01.02.2023. Again, vide impugned order dated 29.09.2023, the petitioner has again been transferred from Distt. Mahasamund to Distt. Raipur to accommodate the respondent No.3 who has been transferred at his own request. 4 Learned State counsel is directed to seek instructions from the respondent authorities in the matter. List the matter after four weeks. Till then, it is directed that the effect and operation of the impugned transfer order dated 29.09.2023 Annexure P/1 shall remain stayed in respect of the petitioner.” 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, it is clear that the petitioner has challenged the transfer order dated 29.09.2023 primarily on the grounds of arbitrariness and malafide, contending that the said transfer was issued not on any genuine administrative grounds but solely to accommodate respondent No. 3, who sought transfer on his own request. It is further noted that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had already granted interim protection to the petitioner vide order dated 06.10.2023, staying the effect and operation of the impugned transfer order. In view of such protection, the petitioner has continued to work at his original place of posting at Rural Engineering Services Division, Mahasamund, where he was posted only recently pursuant to his promotion order dated 30.12.2022 and had joined on 01.02.2023. 8. This Court has further observed that while transfer is an incident of service and within the domain of the employer’s administrative discretion, such power must be exercised fairly, reasonably, and in accordance with settled norms and policies. Frequent transfers 5 within a short span of time, particularly without compelling administrative justification, adversely affect the service conditions and morale of public servants and such actions cannot be sustained in the absence of a sound administrative rationale. 9. Considering the facts of this case, by the efflux of time, it appears that the impugned transfer order dated 29.09.2023 has lost its efficacy. Accordingly, while holding the said order as arbitrary and unsustainable, this Court deems it appropriate to grant liberty to the State to pass fresh and appropriate orders in respect of the transfer of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, rules, and the prevailing transfer policy, if the administrative exigency so warrants. 10. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh