1 2025:CGHC:5508 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 838 of 2025 • Bhookhan Lal Dewangan S/o Baratilal Dewangan Aged About 58 Years Lecturer (Mathematics) Government Polytechnic Dhamtari (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Technical Education Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Principal, Government Polytechnic Dhamtari District Dhamtari (C.G.). 3 - Arunesh Atmapujya Lecturer Dharmu Mahra Govt. Girls Polytechnic Jagdalpur (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/ State : Ms. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer. Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 30/01/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash transfer order (Annexure P-1) in respect of petitioner in the interest of justice. (ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, petitioner has been posted as Leecturer (Mathematics) Government Polytechnic Dhamtari (C.G.). The impugned transfer order dated 15.01.2025 private respondent has been transferred from Govt Polytechnic Jagdalpur to Durg at own request and just to accommodate him, petitioner has been transferred in his place from Govt Polytechnic Dhamtari to Govt Polytechnic Jagdalpur just as his reliever and no other administrative exigency. Earlier also he was posted in schedule area of Bijapur for 2 years from 17.07.2014 to 05.01.2016 and hence also he can not be sent again to schedule area. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been transferred only due to the reason that respondent No. 3 has moved an application for transfer on his own request and he is junior to the petitioner as such the petitioner cannot be transferred 3 . He further submits that though he has continued on the said post for a reasonable period but looking to the fact that he has been transferred only on the basis of transfer short by respondent No. 3. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submission and submits that the transfer order has rightly been passed which is not required to be interfered with. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. 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 10 days and, in turn, the concerned authorities are directed to decide the said representation within a period of 30 days, in accordance with law. 7. Till the decision of the said representation, the petitioner may not be transferred as per order dated 15.01.2025. 8. With this observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat