1 2025:CGHC:2707 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 397 of 2025 1 - Gaurav Bagde S/o Shri Anil Kumar Bagde Aged About 26 Years Posted As Assistant Veterinary Field Officer, Veterinary Dispensary Risama, Department Of Animal Husbandry, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Veterinary Services, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy. Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI 2 Order on Board 16/01/2025 1. Heard. 2. By this petition, this petitioner has sought following relief : “10.1That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the issuance of the order dated 08.01.2025 (ANNEXURE P-1) for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate writ / order quashing and setting aside the order dated 08.01.2025 (ΑΝΝEXURE P-1) to the extent it relates to the petitioner. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court, may deem fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is presently posted as Assistant Veterinary Field Officer at Veterinary Dispensary Risama, District Durg and during probation he has been transferred which is not in accordance with law. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon two orders passed by this Court in WPS No.297 of 2016 in between Samiksha Jain vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2016 SCC Online Chh 137 and WPS No. 5923 of 2017 in between Rahul Swarnakar vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2017 SCC Online Chh 1266 respectively. 3 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submit that in the conditions contained in the appointment order itself it has been stated that the petitioner can be posted anywhere within the State. 6. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter the petitioner is granted liberty to file a detailed representation preferably within a period of one week and the respondent authorities are directed to consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner in a pragmatic manner within a period of four weeks. Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation and directions, the instant petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi