1 2025:CGHC:54311-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 800 of 2025 Rohit Kumar Baghel S/o Shri K.R. Baghel Aged About 35 Years R/o - Near Patel Hardware, Village, Post, Tahsil - Bakawad, District - Baster At Jagdalpur (C.G.) Pin No. 494222 ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Revenue And Calamity Management, Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector Jagdalpur, District - Baster At Jagdalpur (C.G.) 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Karpawand, District - Baster At Jagdalpur (C.G.) 4 - The Tahsildar Karpawand, District - Baster At Jagdalpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manohar Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 07.11.2025 MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.11.07 16:49:37 +0530 2 1. Heard Mr. Manohar Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Y.S. Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for respondents/State. 2. The present writ appeal is preferred assailing the order dated 03.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 10408/2025 (Rohit Kumar Baghel vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others), whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant herein was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. 3. It has been pointed out by learned counsel, appearing for the appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents that in an identical matter, this Bench had dismissed WA No. 749/2025 (Ajay Kumar Netam vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) vide order dated 16.10.2025, observing as follows : “8. On perusal of the record, it is quite vivid that the appellant was initially transferred from Tahsil Karpawand to Tahsil Bakawand vide order dated 10.07.2025 and joined at Bakawand on 18.07.2025. Subsequently, by order dated 21.08.2025, he was assigned duties from Patwari Halka No. 9 to Patwari Halka No. 5, Chhindgaon, in view of administrative exigency and for smooth functioning of Patwari work. 9. It is apparent that only the Halka number and minor administrative allocation changed, and this cannot be construed as a frequent transfer or any infringement of service conditions. No material illegality or perversity is shown in the action of Respondent No. 3, and the 3 learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition. 10. The Collector/Joint Collector/Sub- Divisional Officer are competent to transfer the Patwaris within their Districts as per the administration and exigency of the work and it is for them to deploy the Patwaris according to his administrative exigency which this Court shall normally not interfere unless there is any illegality, favouritism or nepotism is existed which is not available in the present facts and circumstance of the case and also considering the fact that the transfer is an exigency of service and no government employee can insist to remain posted at a particular place and it is the Government to post the employee looking to its exigency. 11. The writ appeal, being devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed..” They further submit that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WA No. 749/2025, this appeal may also be dismissed in the same terms. 4. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this appeal is identical to WA No. 749/2025, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No. 749/2025. 4 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 16.10.2025 passed in WA No. 749/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet