2025:CGHC:59564 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 12233 of 2025 1 - Asha Minj (Forest Ranger Officer) D/o Philip Minj Aged About 42 Years R/o E.W.S. 601, 6th Floor, Himalayan Heights, Phase 2, In Front Of Jain Public School, Dumartarai, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Under Secretary Forest Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Coordinator And Secretary, Transfer Committee Ministry Of General Administration Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Deputy Secretary Forest And Climate Change Department, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest And Chief Of Forest Force, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Additional Chief Secretary, Home And Jail Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492002 (Chairman Of Committee Of Senior Secretaries) 7 - Secretary School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492002 (Committee Member Of Senior Secretaries) 8 - Secretary In - Charge General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492002 (Member Secretary Of Committee Of Senior KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Digitally signed by KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Date: 2025.12.09 11:03:40 +0530 Secretaries) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 08.12.2025 1. The petitioner has instituted the present writ petition challenging the transfer order dated 31.07.2025, whereby she has been transferred from Sankargarh Range (General), Forest Division Balrampur, to Officer on Special Duty, Balrampur Forest Division, State of Chhattisgarh. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently submit that the petitioner had only recently been transferred on 01.01.2025 from Manora Range, Forest Division Jashpur to present place of posting, and within six months, she has again been subjected to another transfer. Such, successive transfers constitute an instance of frequent transfer violating Clause 3.10 of the Transfer Policy, 2025 issued by the State Government. It is further urged that the representation preferred by the petitioner has been negatived vide order dated 16.09.2025 by a wholly non-speaking order, thereby warranting quashment of both orders dated 31.07.2025 and 16.09.2025. 3. Per contra, learned State Counsel would submit that although the impugned order bears the nomenclature of a transfer, its substantive effect is merely to reassign the charge presently she is holding with a different functional capacity of Officer on Special Duty within the same forest range. Hence, it is submitted that the action does not partake with transfer and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have heard the rival submissions advanced by the parties and have scrupulously perused the record. 5. It stands indisputable that the petitioner has been posted at her present place of posting since 01.01.2025 and, by virtue of the impugned order, she has been entrusted with the charge of Officer on Special Duty within the same forest range. In such a factual matrix, the grievance of the petitioner alleging “frequent transfers” is palpably misconceived and deserves to be rejected outrightly. The further submission that the rejection of her representation by a non-speaking order vitiates the administrative action is equally untenable, as no Government employee can insist to remain posted at a particular place in perpetuity. Transfers, being an incidence of service, do not ordinarily impinge upon any civil or fundamental right, and mere absence of elaborate reasoning in rejecting the representation does not render any illegality or perversity warranting interference by this Court. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition (S), being bereft of merit, is dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge kishore