1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 743 of 2023 Siddharth Sahu S/o Shri Praveen Kumar Sahu Aged About 30 Years Presently Working As Sub Engineer At Municipal Corporation, Bhilai District Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Urban Administration And Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Municipal Corporation Bhilai Through The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) 4 - Nagar Panchayat Parpodi Through The Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Parpodi, District Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 26.08.2025 1 The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following relief(s):- YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.08.26 18:27:35 +0530 2 “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside order dated 11.01.2023 (Annexure P/11 whereby the petitioner has been transferred to Municipal Corporation Jagdalpur, District Bastar (CG). 10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work in the present place of posting Le. Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.). 10.3. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant writ petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 11.01.2023, whereby the earlier transfer order dated 13.12.2022 has been modified and the petitioner has now been transferred to Municipal Corporation, Jagdalpur. It is submitted that the petitioner had earlier challenged the transfer order dated 13.12.2022 in WPS No.9166/2022, in which this Hon’ble Court, vide order dated 02.01.2023, was pleased to stay the operation of the transfer order dated 13.12.2022 till the next date of hearing. Despite the said interim protection being in force, the respondents have proceeded to pass the subsequent impugned order dated 11.01.2023, which is wholly illegal, mala fide, arbitrary and amounts to willful disobedience of the interim order passed by this Court. It is further contended that the petitioner was working as a 3 Sub-Engineer in Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, which is his parent Corporation, and by virtue of the provisions contained under Section 58(6) of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, he cannot be transferred to any Nagar Panchayat constituted under the Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961. At the best, his transfer could have been made to any other Municipal Corporation constituted under the Act of 1956, and that too only in compliance with the safeguards and conditions provided under Section 58(6) of the Act. In such a situation, the petitioner would have a lien on the post held in the parent Municipal Corporation, would be entitled to deputation allowance at such rate as the State Government may prescribe by general order, and would be governed by such terms and conditions, including disciplinary control, as may be specified by the State Government. Learned counsel submits that in the instant case, the respondents have acted in gross violation of the statutory provisions contained in Section 58(5) and 58(6) of the Act of 1956. The impugned transfer is also violative of the State Government’s transfer policy, as no approval has been obtained from the competent coordinating authority before issuing the impugned order. As such, the impugned orders dated 13.12.2022 and 11.01.2023 are liable to be set aside. 3 From perusal of the record, it seems that vide order dated 24.01.2023, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed an 4 interim order in favour of the petitioner to the effect that “purely as an interim measure, it is directed that effect and operation of impugned order (Annexure P-1) so far as it relates to petitioner shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing”. 4 From perusal of the record, it is evident that during the pendency of the writ petition, this Court vide order dated 24.01.2023 had granted interim protection to the petitioner by staying the effect and operation of the impugned order (Annexure P/1) insofar as it related to him. In consequence, the petitioner continued at his original place of posting. 5 Having regard to the subsequent developments it seems that by efflux of time the reliefs claimed in the writ petition have lost significance, this Court is of the considered opinion that nothing further survives for adjudication on merits. 6 Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. However, it is observed that dismissal of this petition on the ground of infructuousness shall not debar the State or the competent authority from passing appropriate orders in accordance with law with regard to the posting and transfer of the petitioner, if so required in administrative exigency. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh