Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:47756
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10646 of 2025 Smt. Deepika Kurrey W/o Shri Ravi Shankar Singh Aged About 36 Years Presently Posted And Working As Assistant Engineer (O) O/o Se (City) Circle, Cspdcl, Bilaspur Dist- Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s) versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Energy, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur Distt- Raipur Chhattisgarh,
2. The General Manager Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (Cspdcl) Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)
3. The Executive Director Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (CSPDCL) Raipur Distt- Raipur, C.G.
4. Superintending Engineer (City) Circle (CSPDCL) Bilaspur, Distt- Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dhani Ram Patel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate For State : Mr. K.S. Saini, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.09.18 10:27:31 +0530
2 17/09/2025
1. The petitioner has filed this petition assailing impugned transfer order dated 30.06.2025 issued by respondent No.3 by which she has been transferred as Assistant Engineer, office of Superintending Engineer (City) circle, Bilaspur to Assistant Engineer (Vigilance) Superintending Engineer (City) Circle Bilaspur. 2. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is subjected to frequent transfer as she was earlier transferred as Assistant Engineer (TSG) Sub Division Sarangarh, Executive Engineer (STM) Division District Raigarh to Officer of Assistant Engineer (Executive) Office of Superintending Engineer (City circle) Bilaspur on 24.09.2024 and prior to it she has been transferred as Assistant Engineer from the office of Superintending Engineer (City circle) Bilaspur to office of Superintending Engineer (Vigilance) Bilaspur as Assistant Engineer. He would further submit that the petitioner is carrying pregnancy, therefore, it will be difficult for her to travel three divisions i.e. Bilaspur, Pendra and Mungeli and would pray for quashing of the impugned order. 3. On the other hand learned counsel for respondent/CSPDCL would submit that the petitioner by impugned transfer order dated 30.06.2025 has already been relieved and she has been posted at Bilaspur as Assistant Engineer, office of Superintending Engineer (City) circle, Bilaspur to Assistant Engineer (Vigilance) Superintending Engineer (City) Circle Bilaspur and other officers are also posted to assist her.
He would further submit that by this transfer she it cannot be said that any restriction is imposed upon her and this transfer has
3 been done on the administrative exigency and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. From perusal of the impugned order dated 30.06.2025, it is quite vivid that the petitioners has been transferred as Assistant Engineer, office of Superintending Engineer (City) circle, Bilaspur to Assistant Engineer (Vigilance) Superintending Engineer (City) Circle Bilaspur, though she may travel but other officers are also available with her, therefore, it cannot be said that she will face any difficult for carrying out of her job. It is well settled principle of law that the petitioner cannot insist to remain posted in a particular place of posting for a particular period or for the entire service period as transfer is exigency of service. The Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of SK Naushad Rahaman & Other Vs. Union of India & Other 2020 (12) SCC 1 has held the government servant cannot insist to remain posted at one place for ever, as such I am of the view that the impugned order dated 30.06.2025 does not suffer from perversity or illegality, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed and it is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to pursue her representation which has already been filed before the respondents. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge Santosh