1 2026:CGHC:18036 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4919 of 2022 * - Shah Zafar Khan S/o Abdul Gafar Khan, Aged About 59 Years Working As Assistant Food Officer, Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Special Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, Gariyaband, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Collector, Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal and Ms. Diksha Jaiswal, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 21/04/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondent authorities to forthwith release the unpaid salary to the petitioner for the period from December, 2020 to August, 2021, in accordance with law. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.04.22 18:50:01 +0530 2 2. The facts, in brief, are that at the relevant time, the petitioner was posted on the post of Assistant Food Officer in Gariyaband. His services were transferred vide order dated 14.12.2020 whereby he was transferred from Gariyaband to Kondagaon. The petitioner filed WPS No. 5280/2020 challenging therein the said transfer order. Writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 17.12.2020 wherein liberty was granted to the petitioner to make a representation before the respondent authorities ventilating his grievances and direction was issued to decide representation within period of 30 days. The petitioner did not comply with the transfer order and kept waiting result of his representation which was finally rejected vide order dated 12.08.2021. The petitioner joined at transferred place on 31.08.2021. The petitioner has filed this petition claiming therein salary for period from December 2020 to August 2021. 3. Mr. Goutam Khetrapal and Ms. Diksha Jaiswal, learned Advocates appearing for the petitioner would argue that the petitioner was transferred from Gariyaband to Kondagaon contrary to the transfer policy and therefore, in WPS No. 5280/2020 liberty was granted to make a representation before the respondent authorities, but decision was not taken by the State authorities within period of 30 days and therefore, he could not join at the transferred place. They would submit that there was negligence on the part of the respondent authorities, but deliberately the petitioner has not been paid salary for period from December 2020 till August 2021. They would pray to allow this petition. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents would submit that the petitioner failed to comply with the transfer order dated 14.12.2020. He would 3 contend that no interim protection was granted in favour of the petitioner in WPS No. 5280/2020. He would further contend that as there was no interim order, the petitioner should have complied with the transfer order, but he joined at transferred place on 31.08.2021 after rejection of his representation. He would submit that there was negligence on the part of the petitioner himself and thus, he is not entitled for salary for said period. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Admittedly, no interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner in WPS No. 5280/2020 and petitioner failed to comply with the transfer order and joined at transferred place on 31.08.2021, after rejection of his representation. It is apparent that the petitioner himself was negligent and failed to comply with the transfer order, therefore, in my opinion, no relief can be granted as sought for in the instant writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti