1 2025:CGHC:4384 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 654 of 2025 1 - Chiman Lal Sahu S/o Prem Chand Sahu Aged About 58 Years Posted As Executive Engineer At (Cspdcl) In The Office Of (Sancha / Sandha) Division Patan, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Energy, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, P.S. And Post Office Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The General Manager Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (Cspdcl), Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Executive Director Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (Cspdcl), Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Bhuneshwar Prasad Deepak S/o Unknown Posted As Executive Engineer At (Cspdcl) In The Office Of (Pariyojana) Division Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner :- Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For State :- Ms. Poorva Tiwari, P.L. For Respondents No.2 to 4 :- Mr. Krishna Tondon, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Mayank VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 Chandrakar, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 24.01.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 16/01/2025. 10.2 That any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be granted in favor of the petitioner safeguarding her interest.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide order dated 16.01.2025, the services of the petitioner has been transferred from District Durg to the District Mahasamund. He submits that the said transfer order has been passed only to accommodate respondent No.4 in place of the petitioner and the petitioner has been transferred twice during one year, therefore, the said impugned order is illegal, bad in law and requires to be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submission and submits that the transfer order has been passed on administrative basis, which is absolutely correct and requires no interference. 4. Considering the submissions made by the parties, the petitioner is directed to file a representation raising all his grievances before the authorities concerned within a period of two weeks 3 and, in turn, the concerned authorities are directed to decide the said representation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, in accordance with law. 5. Till the decision of the said representation, the impugned transfer order dated 16.01.2025 is kept in abeyance. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction, the instant petition is hereby disposed off. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha