1 2025:CGHC:57147 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 12996 of 2025 Vivek Kumar Soni S/o C R Soni Aged About 35 Years R/o Village And Post Aasra, Tahsil Dongargaon, P S Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 2. Commissioner Cum Director, Directorate Of Health Services, North Block, Sector 19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 4. Collector, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 5. Block Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 6. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 7. Under Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. ---------Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyan, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 25/11/2025 SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.11.27 10:21:55 +0530 2 1. The petitioner has filed this petition assailing the order dated 30.06.2025 issued by respondent No. 4/Collector by which the petitioner has been transferred from Primary Health Centre, Arjuni Development Block Dongargaon District Rajnandgaon to Primary Health Centre, Buchatola, Development Block Churia, District Rajnandgaon on the administrative ground. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 07.10.2025 by which the Committee constituted by the State for deciding the representation has been rejected. 2. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner order has been issued by the Collector whereas he is divisional level officer, therefore, transfer order should be issued by the State Government only as such transfer order without jurisdiction. He would further submit that the committee deciding his representation has not taken into consideration the ground raised by the petitioner and has mechanically without application of mind has rejected his representation. He would further submit that the petitioner’s mother is suffering from cancer and no one in his family to look after his mother and would pray for quashing of the impugned transfer order 30.06.2025 as well as order dated 07.10.2025. 3. On the other hand learned counsel for the State would submit that the transfer is incident of service and Government employee cannot insist to remain posted at one place for ever and the transfer order is not liable to be set aside by this Court. He would further submit that no service condition is adversely affected as such no reasoned order has been passed by the respondents while considering or disallowing representation of the petitioner and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 5. Considering the submission, the petitioner has nowhere pleaded in the petition that since how long he is posted at the present place of posting. This Court put certain query to the petitioner it has been informed by him that he is posted there about 13 years and the transferred place is 56 KM away from the present place of posting. Even the transfer policy provides that the Collector is empowered to transfer any employee within its jurisdiction and the transfer order is approved from the in-charge concerned Minister as such there is sufficient compliance of the transfer policy, therefore, transfer order is not liable to be set aside as it has been issued by the competent authority and the petitioner is posted there more than 13 years. It is well settled legal position of law that government servant servant cannot insist to remain posted at a particular place for ever. Further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no detailed reasoned order has been passed by the respondents, further considering that the transfer is incident of service and no service condition of the petitioner is adversely affected by this transfer and it is also not necessary for the respondent to pass reasoned order. Considering the nature that the transfer order dated 30.06.2025 as well as representation dated 07.10.2025 does not suffers from perversity or illegality which warrants interference by this Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge santosh