1 2025:CGHC:53206-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 780 of 2025 Dr. Shayam Shankar Raj S/o Late J.R. Raj Aged About 52 Years Working As Incharge Chief Medical And Health Officer (Cmho), And Posted At Narayanpur Division Bastar, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(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 Chhattisgarh 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.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.10.31 18:36:23 +0530 2 For Appellant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 31 .10.2025 1. Heard Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant through video conferencing. Also heard Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State. 2. The present intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 11293 of 2025 (Dr. Shyam Shankar Raj vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner herein was dismissed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the service of the appellant was transferred from the post of Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur to the District Hospital, Bastar. Aggrieved by the said transfer, the appellant preferred WPS No. 6890 of 2025 before this Court. The learned Single Judge, vide order dated 15.07.2025, directed the appellant to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority, and the respondents were directed to consider and decide the same by passing a reasoned order. It was further directed that no 3 coercive steps be taken against the appellant till such decision was made. Pursuant to the said order, the appellant submitted a representation, which came to be rejected by the respondents vide order dated 21.08.2025. Thereafter, the appellant preferred WPS No.11293 of 2025, challenging the rejection order as well as the transfer order, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 26.09.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant assails the legality, validity, and propriety of the rejection order dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure P/1 to the writ petition), passed by respondent No. 2, whereby the Transfer Committee of Senior Secretaries held that there was no violation of the transfer policy dated 05.06.2025. The appellant also challenges the transfer order dated 26.06.2025 (Annexure P/2 to the writ petition), issued by respondent No. 1, transferring him from Narayanpur, District Narayanpur (C.G.) to District Hospital, Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.), on the ground that the said order is arbitrary, illegal, and in contravention of the transfer policy. 5. It is further submitted that earlier, vide order dated 16.08.2024, the appellant was transferred from Community Health Centre, Darbha, District Bastar, to the office of the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur, as Incharge CMHO. His name appeared at Serial No. 16 in the said transfer order, and he assumed charge at Narayanpur on 21.08.2024. The appellant contends that since then, he has been performing his duties sincerely and efficiently. However, within a short 4 span of about ten months, he has again been transferred by the impugned order dated 26.06.2025, wherein his name appears at Serial No. 19. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the impugned transfer order is contrary to Clauses 3.9 and 3.10 of the Transfer Policy, 2025, which stipulate that an employee who has not completed two years of service at a transferred place shall not be transferred, and that as on 01.06.2025, employees who have not completed one year at their present posting shall not be transferred. It is urged that the appellant, having served less than one year at Narayanpur, could not have been transferred under the said policy. Hence, the impugned transfer and rejection orders are arbitrary, unsustainable in law, and liable to be set aside. The appellant further relies on the order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 07.05.2025 in Dr. Iqbal Hussain v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, wherein a transfer made in violation of the policy was set aside. It is submitted that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate these material facts while dismissing the writ petition. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the learned Single Judge erred in holding that the transfer policy is merely in the nature of administrative instructions and not enforceable as a matter of right. It is urged that the findings recorded are contrary to the material on record, and that the petition was dismissed on erroneous grounds, overlooking vital facts. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is bad in law and deserves to 5 be set aside, and the appeal be allowed by granting the reliefs sought in the writ petition. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel supports the order of the learned Single Judge, submitting that the appellant was only holding the charge of the post of Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur. Subsequently, respondent No. 4/Dr. T.R. Kunwar, who is senior to the appellant, was posted as CMHO, and therefore, to avoid administrative complications, the appellant was reverted to his substantive post as Medical and Health Officer at District Hospital, Bastar. It is contended that there is no illegality or arbitrariness in the transfer order, and the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and carefully perused the entire record. 10. From the record, it is evident that the appellant was holding the charge of the post of Incharge Chief Medical and Health Officer, Narayanpur, and not substantively appointed to the said post. The said arrangement was purely temporary, which has now been withdrawn upon the posting of a senior officer. The appellant has been reverted to his substantive post of Medical and Health Officer. It is a settled principle of law that an employee cannot claim a right to continue in a position held only as an Incharge, and such an arrangement does not confer any vested right. Therefore, the transfer of the appellant to his substantive post cannot be said to be either illegal or arbitrary so as to 6 warrant interference by this Court. 11. Considering the above discussion and the well-settled principles of law governing transfers, we find no merit in this writ appeal. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is well-reasoned and does not suffer from any legal infirmity. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan