2025:CGHC:49407 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 11293 of 2025 1 - Dr. Shyam Shankar Raj S/o Late Shri J. R. Raj Aged About 52 Years Working As Incharge Chief Medical And Health Officer (Cmho), And Posted At Narayanpur Division Bastar, District Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Transfer Committee Of Senior Secretaries, Department Of General Administration, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director, Directorate Of Health And Family Welfare Department, 3rd Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Dr. T. R. Kunwar, S/o Shri Shobh Rai Kunwar, Aged About 53 Years Posted As Medical Specialist At District Hospital, Bijapur, District - Bijapur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. V.K. Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 26.09.2025 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing order KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Digitally signed by KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Date: 2025.09.26 16:05:40 +0530 dated 21.08.2025 by which his representation has been rejected. 2. The facts in brief are that, the services of the petitioner has been transferred from Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur to District Hospital Bastar, District -Bastar. The petitioner filed WPS No. 6890 of 2025 before this Court. The Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 directed the petitioner to move fresh representation which in turn the respondents were directed to pass a reasoned order and till then no coercive steps were to be taken against the petitioner. Pursuant to the said order, he preferred representation before the respondents and the respondents rejected the same vide impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without considering the grievance of the petitioner his representation has been rejected which is in violation of principle of natural justice. He would further submit that within 9 months he has been retransferred from the post of Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur. Earlier he was posted transferred on 16.08.2024. Therefore, he would pray for allowing the petition. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner was posted as Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur which has been withdrawn as Dr. T.R. Kunwar has been posted who is senior to the petitioner, therefore, to avoid administrative complexity he has been posted to his substantive post of Medical and Health Officer at the District Hospital, Bastar, therefore, would pray for dismissal of the petition. Page 3 of 4 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that without assigning any reason, the impugned order has been passed. This submission is deserved to be rejected as by the impugned transfer order no service condition of the petitioner has been adversely affected and the rejection order has no civil consequences, therefore, the detail or reasoned order is not required to be passed. Even otherwise, transfer is an incident of service and a Government Servant has no indefatigable right to remain posted to a particular place of posting. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of SK Naushad Rahaman & Other Vs. Union of India & Other [2022 (12) SCC 1] has examined the scope of transfer to a government servant in detail and held as under:- “24 First and foremost, transfer in an All India Service is an incident of service. Whether, and if so where, an employee should be posted are matters which are governed by the exigencies of service. An employee has no fundamental right or, for that matter, a vested right to claim a transfer or posting of their choice. 25 Second, executive instructions and administrative directions concerning transfers and postings do not confer an indefeasible right to claim a transfer or posting. Individual convenience of persons who are employed in the service is subject to the overarching needs of the administration.” 6. In view of the aforesaid settled position of law, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have committed irregularity and illegality in transferring the petitioner is liable to be rejected. 7. Further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been transferred within a period of 9 months. From perusal of the record, it is quite vivid that the petitioner was appointed as the Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur which has been withdrawn and he has been posted to his substantive post at District Hospital, Bastar. It is well settled position of law that an employee is entitled to be continued at his substantive post. An assignment of position of In-charge does not confer any right to the petitioner to continue to the post of incharge, therefore, the impugned order does suffer from the illegality or irregularity which warrants inference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be and it is dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge kishore