1 2026:CGHC:7242 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1333 of 2026 Sanjeev Ranjan Singh S/o Siyaji Singh Aged About 34 Years Sub Engineer R/o Near Nirankari Bhawan Ward No 23 Street 6 Deepak Nagar Durg Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Development Commissioner Vikash Bhawan Sector 19 Atal Nagar New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Executive Engineer Rural Engineering Service Durg Division Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Executive OfÏcer Jila Panchayat Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2026.02.10 17:57:42 +0530 2 5 - Chief Executive OfÏcer Janpad Panchayat Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Diksha Gouraha, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 10.02.2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner has called in question the legality and validity of the recommendation dated 21.8.2025 (Annexure-P/1) made by the Transfer Committee by which the representation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 22.7.2025 passed by this Court in WPS No.7690 of 2025 has been rejected. The petitioner is also challenging the order dated 28.1.2026 by which he has been transferred from Janpad Panchayat, Patan, District Durg (substantive place of posting is Janpad Panchayat, Durg) to Janpad Panchayat, Katekalyan, District Dantewada as also the order dated and 29.1.2026 by which he has been relieved to join at the new place of posting. 3 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he was initially appointed as Sub Engineer (Civil) on 07.09.2013 and was posted in the Scheduled Area at Kondagaon. After completing about four years of service there, he was transferred by order dated 29.07.2016 to Janpad Panchayat, Durg, which, according to the petitioner, is his substantive place of posting. Though he was temporarily attached to Janpad Panchayat, Patan by the Executive Engineer, his salary continued to be drawn from Durg and all ofÏcial communications, including training and duty orders, showed his posting as Janpad Panchayat, Durg. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that by the order dated 30.06.2025, he has been shown to be transferred from Janpad Panchayat, Patan, whereas his substantive posting is at Janpad Panchayat, Durg. On the basis of such order, he has been directed to be relieved, which according to him is illegal and arbitrary, as the attachment order cannot be treated as a transfer order and the Executive Engineer has no authority to supersede the posting order issued by the State Government. 4. It is further contended that there is a complete ban on attachment as per circular dated 04.06.2001 and that the petitioner has already served for more than four years in a 4 Scheduled Area. As per the circular dated 03.06.2015, an employee who has worked for more than two years in a Scheduled Area is entitled to be posted in a Non-Scheduled Area, yet by the impugned order he has again been sent to a Scheduled Area. The petitioner also submits that his representation raising all these grounds has been rejected without proper application of mind. 5. On the last date of hearing, learned State Counsel sought time to obtain instructions on the said issue. Today, learned State Counsel submits, on instructions, that the substantive posting of the petitioner is at Janpad Panchayat, Durg, and he was only attached at Janpad Panchayat, Patan. This fact is also borne out from Annexure P/3 (relieving order), wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the substantive posting of the petitioner is at Janpad Panchayat, Durg. She further places reliance on communication dated 09.02.2026, which clarifies that the petitioner’s substantive posting is at Janpad Panchayat, Durg and that he has been relieved from the transfer place on 30.01.2026. 6. Mere mentioning of a particular place of posting in the transfer order, when in fact the substantive posting of the 5 petitioner is at Janpad Panchayat, Durg, by itself does not constitute a valid ground to interfere with the transfer order, especially when the record clearly indicates that the petitioner was only attached at Patan and his substantive post remains at Durg. 7. The contention of the petitioner regarding earlier posting in scheduled area and the policy circular has also been considered by the competent authority while rejecting the representation, and no arbitrariness or non-application of mind is made out from the impugned order. 8. It is noteworthy to mention here that against the transfer order dated 30.06.2025, the petitioner approached this Court by filing WPS No. 7690/2025, which has been disposed of by this Court on 22.07.2025 observing thus: “2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that against the said transfer order the petitioner has already made representation which is still pending before the transfer committee. As per Clause 8 of the transfer policy dated 05.06.2025, there is in-house remedy for making representation against the transfer order before the transfer committee who will consider the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law. 6 Clause 8 of the said transfer policy dated 05.06.2025 is reproduced as below: "8. स्थााሪतरण से व्यथिथात शासेकीय सेवकी ቛኋर अपाሪ स्थााሪतरण की विवरू्ቍ अभ्यवदाሪ की वल स्थााሪतरण ाሪवित की उቤ቏घाሪ हो!ाሪ पर हो उ्ሹ उቤ቏घाሪ हो!ाሪ वल की वि#की की सेबंध ेሰ' स्प्ቖ आधर* की सेथा स्थााሪतरण आदशा जार हो!ाሪ की वितथिथा से 15 विदवसे की भीतर ्ቚश्ाሪधाሪ स्थााሪतरण आदशा की ्ቚवित सेविहोत शासेाሪ ቛኋर गवि0त वरिर्቗ सेवि3व* की सेविेሰवित की सेय!जाकी एव सेवि3व, सेेሰन्य ्ቚशासेाሪ विवभीग की! ्ቚस्त6त विकीय जा सेकी ग। सेविेሰवित ቛኋर ऐसे ्ቚकीरण* की इसे स्थााሪतरण ाሪवित की ्ቚकीशा ेሰ' पर्ቌण कीराሪ की पश्3त अपाሪ अाሪ6शासे सेबंथिधत विवभीग की! ्ቚवि;त की जाएग।" 3. Be that as it may, since in-house remedy has been provided to the employee concerned to raise the grievances before the transfer committee against transfer order, this court deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to move fresh representation before the transfer committee along with copy of this order within a week from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the transfer committee, in turn, shall take a decision on the representation so made by the petitioner in accordance with law in an objective manner and pass a reasoned order on its own merits 7 within a further period of two weeks. Till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.” 9. In compliance of the said order the petitioner submitted a representation before the transfer committee who after considering all the aspects of the matter recommended for rejection of the representation of the petitioner vide recommendation dated 21.08.2025 holding therein that the transfer order has been passed on the basis of administrative exigency and the petitioner failed to establish any justifiable reason. Subsequently by order dated 28.01.2026, directed for relieving the employees who has been transferred on 30.06.2025 and pursuant to the said order of the State Government, the chief Executive OfÏcer Janpad Panchayat Durg by order dated 29.01.2026 relieved the petitioner to enable him to join at the new place of posting. The orders passed by the respondent authorities as also the recommendation made by the transfer committee is just and proper warranting no interference of this Court. 10. It is well settled that transfer is an incidence of service and ordinarily courts should not interfere with transfer orders unless the same are shown to be vitiated by malafides, passed 8 by an incompetent authority, or in violation of statutory provisions. In the present case, no such illegality or perversity is made out. 11. In view of the above, this Court does not find any illegality, arbitrariness or infirmity in the impugned order transferring the petitioner from his substantive post at Janpad Panchayat, Durg to Dantewada. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib