1 2026:CGHC:19279 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1186 of 2022 1 - Akash Kumar Sen S/o Shri Deepak Kumar Sen, Aged About 29 Years Presently Posted And R/o Village Naagpura, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director, Urban Administration And Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Its General Administrative Department, Mantralaya, Dau Kalyand Singh Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Upper Chief Secretary, Panchayat And Urban And Rural Development Department, RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 5 - Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Durg, Chhattisgarh. 6 - The Collector, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Mamta Patel, Advocate on behalf of Ms. Lata Nayak, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/ State : Mr. S.S. Choubey, G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 27/04/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “I. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 08/12/2021 bearing letter No.4819/3708/22-1/2021 passed by the respondent No.4. (Annexure-P/1). II. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner and stay them transfer on the post of Panchayat Secretary, Durg, by the post of Guidelines for Service Condition of panchayat strictly in accordance with the provisions of Rule 2008. III. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioners. IV. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit 3 and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner is not serving in any conventional departmental cadre, his service conditions are governed by the Guidelines for Service Conditions of Panchayat issued by Respondent No. 4 under the Rules, 2008, particularly Rule 08 thereof. It is contended that in accordance with the said statutory framework, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 15.11.2021 before the District Magistrate (Collector), Durg, challenging the action of Respondent No. 5, who has illegally transferred the petitioner from the post of Panchayat Secretary, Durg to another post in complete violation of the prescribed Rules and Guidelines. It is further submitted that the impugned transfer order has been issued dehors the provisions of the Rules, 2008 and contrary to the governing service guidelines, thereby rendering the same wholly without jurisdiction. Learned counsel argues that the transfer is not only procedurally flawed but also substantively arbitrary, as it has been effected in an unjustified and impermissible manner, ignoring the safeguards and conditions stipulated under Rule 08. The impugned communication, it is urged, is ex facie perverse, arbitrary, and illegal, being passed without due application of mind and in disregard of the petitioner’s rights under the applicable service framework. In these circumstances, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to exercise its writ jurisdiction to 4 set aside the impugned order and grant appropriate relief to the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has already joined at the transferred place in the year 2022, and therefore no cause of action now survives for adjudication. It is contended that the writ petition has become infructuous and is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Accordingly, in view of the subsequent developments and the fact that no subsisting cause of action survives for adjudication, the present petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat