Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11736 (CHH)

SANTOSH KUMAR SORI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/3604/2026 · 2026-04-26

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:19273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3604 of 2026 1 - Santosh Kumar Sori S/o Kali Ram Sori Aged About 55 Years Principal (T-Cadre), Posted At Government Higher Secondary School, Sitagaon, Block Development Manpur, District Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Ministry Of School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director Office Of Directorate Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, New Bhawan, New Raipur 3 - District Education Officer District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki Chhattisgarh 4 - Block Education Officer Block Manpur, District Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Devendra Kumar Swarnkar, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer. SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.05.04 13:33:28 +0530 2 Order on Board 27/04/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue suitable direction to the respective concerned authority i.e. respondent No.2 to modify the transfer order of the petitioner looking to the undue hardship of the petitioner i.e. health issues of his father who is 80 years old person who need a care. 10.2. Any other relief, which may be deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be provided in favour of the petitioner. ” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that pursuant to order of promotion dated 29.08.2025, petitioner was working on the post of Lecturer LB and thereafter based on the counseling proceedings petitioner was posted at Govt. High School Sitagaon District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki. He contended that petitioner joined service on his promotional post, however it is too far from the earlier place of posting and his residence. Father of the petitioner is old aged person aged about 80 years and is suffering with medical aliments. Petitioner has approached this Court earlier and has filed writ petition bearing WPS No.1800/2026 which was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and take decision on the representation of the petitioner within 3 specific time frame, respondent authority has passed an order on 20.03.2026 rejecting the representation in an arbitrary manner. The grievance assigned by the petitioner in the representation with regard to old age of his father and suffering from medical aliments inappropriate manner. 3. Counsel for the State opposes the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner had not supported the grounds raised in this petition by filing documents of treatment of father of the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 5. The case of the petitioner is that the place of posting of the petitioner has been changed upon his promotion, hence the said posting can not be said to be made on transfer of petitioner. The only ground which is taken by the petitioner in this writ petition as also in the representation before the respondent authority is that father of the petitioner is aged about 80 years and is suffering with many severe deceases. The petitioner has not submitted any documents to show that petitioners’ father is suffering with any severe decease and is taking continues treatment from any particular hospital. 6. In the aforesaid facts of the case, the ground raised in this writ petition in the opinion of this Court is not substantiated by producing any evidence in this regard. For the foregoing discussions I do not find any error in the decision taken by the 4 respondent authorities on the representation submitted by the petitioner. 7. In view of the above, this writ petition being sans merit, is liable to be, and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi