2025:CGHC:55051 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 12254 of 2025 1 - Renu Prakash W/o Shri Jainendra Kose Aged About 47 Years Presently Posted As District Program Officer, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Women And Child Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Women And Child Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Block-1, Second Floor, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Secretary General Administration Department And Coordinator Of Transfer Committee, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For petitioner : Mr. Palash Tiwari, Advocate. For State. : Mr. Luv Sharma, P. L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas. Order on Board 12.11.2025 1. The petitioner has filed present petition assailing her transfer order dated 07.10.2025 by which she has been transferred from the office of District Prograrmme Officer, Korba to the office of District Programme Officer, Kondagaon. She has also assailed order dated 07.10.2025 by which her representation has been rejected by the Committee. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a victim of frequent transfer within a short span of time i.e. on 13.07.2023 KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Digitally signed by KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Date: 2025.11.13 18:48:14 +0530 2 she has been transferred from Jagdalpur to Jashpur, on 13.03.2024 i.e. within less than one year, she has been transferred from Jashpur to Korba and again on 30.06.2025 vide impugned transfer order within one year and three months, she has been transferred from Korba to Kondagaon. He would further submit that the impugned transfer is violation of Clause 3.10 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025 which provides that a government servant shall not ordinarily be transferred within 2 years. He would further submit that the petitioner has some personal difficulties as her husband is suffering from heart ailment and her son is in mid academic session, but the committee has not considered the ground raised by her in her representation and without assigning any reason in mechanical way has rejected it, therefore, he would pray for setting aside the impugned transfer order. 3. Learned State counsel would submit that certain allegations were levelled against the petitioner, therefore, she has been transferred in short span of time on adminstrative ground for more than one time and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost satisfaction. 5. This Court on 31.10.2025 directed the State to seek instruction and file affidavit. In pursuance of the direction, the State has filed affidavit wherein it has been stated as follows:- f. That, while the petitioner was working at District Jashpur, complaints were received alleging financial irregularities and illegalities to be committed by the petitioner in implementation of 3 the centrally sponsored scheme "Beti Bachao Beti Padhao and also against her social status. It is submitted that taking cognizance of the allegations contained in the complaints, inquiry has been ordered to be conducted by the Director State Level Resources Centre, WCD Raipur To demonstrate this fact, copies of the complaints and letter dated 06/05/2024 are filed herewith as Annexure A/1 colly It is submitted that the said complaints were received after issuance of the transfer order dated 13/03/2024. g. That, in District Korba, the performance of the petitioner was not good as in certain Anganbadi Centres, the food-grains were not supplying /providing in time and the illegalities in this regard were also highlighted in the local newspapers and taking cognizance of the publication in newspapers about the illegalities in not providing / supplying the food-grains to the Anganbadi Centres, the notices were also issued to the petitioner on 12/07/2024 and 24/01/2025 respectively. To demonstrate this fact, copies of the notices dated 12/07/2024 and 24/01/2025 are filed herewith as Annexure A/2 colly. h. That, as in District Korba, there were certain illegalities pointed out on the part of the petitioner which compelled the State Government to post the petitioner anywhere from District Korba and therefore. vide impugned order dated 30/06/2025 (Annexure P/2), the petitioner was transferred from District Korba to District Kondagaon on administrative ground. I. That in addition to the above, another complaint against the petitioner alleging illegal demand of money and mental harassment by the petitioner has also been received from one Mamta Tuli Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Project, Korba and taking cognizance of the said complaint, the Collector District Korba has been requested to submit report after conducting the inquiry on the said complaint and to demonstrate this fact, copies of the complaint and letter dated 22/10/2025 are filed herewith as Annexure A/3 colly. j. That, the deponent respectfully submits that from the aforesaid, it appears that the transfer of the petitioner has been affected mainly on account of complaints being made against the petitioner. 6. From bare perusal of the affadavit, it is quite vivid that certain allegations have been levelled against the petitioner with regard to her conduct and behaviour which has been forwarded to the Director, Women and Child Development, Raipur. Prior to it also certain allegations against the petitioner with regard to her conduct and 4 behaviour were received which is sufficient for the State to draw an opinion to place the petitioner at another place on adminsitrative ground. Considering this aspect of the matter, the first contention of the petitioner that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent tranfer and there is violation of Clause 3.1 of the Tranfer Policy deserves to be rejected and accordingly it is rejected. 7. Further the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to personal difficulty about the health of her husband and mid academic session of her son, it is for the employer to examine the issue as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of SK Naushad Rahaman & Other Vs. Union of India & Other [2022 (12) SCC 1]. This Court cannot interfere in the transfer order on the count of personal difficulty. It is well settled position of law that the transfer is an incident of service. An employee cannot insist to remain posted at a particular place of posting for ever. Even otherwise, due to the impugned transfer order no civil rights of the petitioner is being adversely affected which warrants interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition sans merits and it is dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Deshmukh