1 / 6 2026:CGHC:5745 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1200 of 2026 Santosh Kumar Vanik S/o Shri Krishna Kumar Vanik Aged About 38 Years Occupation - Service, Working As M.L.T. (Medical Lab Technologist), Posted In District Hospital Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Secretary Department Of General Administration, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Director Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Health Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - The Collector District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 5 - The Joint Director Division Sarguja, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh 6 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer District Hospital, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 7 - The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Medical Superintendent District Hospital, Jashpur District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 2 / 6 8 - The Block Medical Officer Community Health Center, Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. A. N. Bhakta, Advocate along with Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 02.02.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case from the authorities concerned for its kind perusal. 10.2 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 13.10.2025 (Annesxure P-1 Colly, SI. NO. 11) arising out of the recommendation made by Transfer Redressal Committee on 07.10.2025, arising out of the representation made by the petitioner on 25.07.2025 (Annexure P-2) before the Transfer Redressal Committee (Senior Secretarate Committee), Raipur, arising out of the order dated 22.07.2025 (Annexure P-3) in Writ petition(s) no. 7378/2025, arising out of the transfer order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure P-4) issued by the Respondent no. 4 (Collector Jashpur), in the interest of justice. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble High Court deems fit and proper, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while holding the post of Medical Lab Technologist at District Hospital, Jashpur is transferred to Primary Health Centre, Champa, Block Bagicha, District- 3 / 6 Jashpur on administrative grounds. Petitioner had submitted representation before the Committee constituted under the Transfer Policy raising the grounds that wife of petitioner is also a Government servant and is holding the post of Staff Nurse at District Hospital, Jashpur and, therefore, both of them are to be posted at the same place. Child of petitioner is also studying in school and further that wife of petitioner is carrying pregnancy of 6-7 months. The Committee while considering the representation submitted by petitioner has not considered all the grounds and has passed the order on 07.10.2025 rejecting the same only considering that transfer of petitioner is on administrative ground. 3. Learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for petitioner and submits that petitioner in this writ petition has not specifically pleaded as to since when petitioner is posted in present place of posting i.e. at District Hospital, Jashpur. He however contended that transfer is incidence of service and employee cannot claim as a matter of right to be posted at a particular place. The ground raised by counsel of petitioner based on the transfer policy that husband and wife is to be kept at one place, is as far as possible and the clauses of transfer policy cannot be read as a statute. He also pointed out the transfer order is dated 30.06.2025 and about more than six months has already been lapsed from the date of transfer. 4. At this stage, counsel for petitioner submits that till date petitioner has not been relieved and therefore, interim protection may be granted till the exam of his child is completed and also delivery of his wife. He places reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the 4 / 6 matter of S.K. Naushad Rehman and Others reported in 2022 volume 12 SCC 1. 5. Learned counsel for State submits that pursuant to the observation made by this Court he has sought instructions and according to instructions petitioner has not been relieved from the present place of posting and no other person/lab technologist has been posted in place of petitioner. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused documents available on record. 7. Upon asking learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that petitioner has served for considerable period, in the present place of posting. In the aforementioned facts of the case, petitioner being Government Servant cannot claim as a matter of right to be posted at particular place. Transfer is an incidence of service and it is for the employee to comply with the order/direction of the superior authority. It is for the employer to post an employee looking to the need and requirement of employee. 8. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) & Ors Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. [(1991) Supp. (2) SCC 659] has considered the issue with regard to transfer of the government servant and held thus: “4. In our opinion, the Courts should not interfere with a transfer Order which are made in public interest and for administrative reasons unless the transfer Orders are made in violation of any mandatory statutory Rule or on the ground of malafide. A Government servant holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at one place or the other, he is liable to be transferred from one place to the other. Transfer Orders issued by the competent authority do not violate any of his legal rights. Even if a transfer Order is passed in violation of executive instructions or Orders, the Courts ordinarily should not 5 / 6 interfere with the Order instead affected party should approach the higher authorities in the Department. If the Courts continue to interfere with day-to-day transfer Orders issued by the Government and its subordinate authorities, there will be complete chaos in the Administration which would not be conducive to public interest. The High Court over looked these aspects in interfering with the transfer Orders.” 9. In the case of Union of India vs. S.L. Abbas [(1993) 4 SCC 357], Hon'ble Supreme Court held thus:- “7. Who should be transferred where, is a matter for the appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. While ordering the transfer, there is no doubt, the authority must keep in mind the guidelines issued by the Government on the subject. Similarly, if a person makes any representation with respect to his transfer, the appropriate authority must consider the same having regard to the exigencies of administration. The guidelines say that as far as possible, the husband and the wife must be posted at the same place. The said guideline, however, does not confer upon the government employee a legally enforceable right.” 10. In the case of Punjab and Sind Bank and Ors Vs. Durgesh Kuwar [(2020) 19 SCC 46]. Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the transfer of the senior officer of different sector banking institution has observed thus :- “17. We must begin our analysis of the rival submissions by adverting to the settled principle that transfer is an exigency of service. An employee cannot have a choice of postings. Administrative circulars and guidelines are indicators of the manner in which the transfer policy has to be implemented. However, an administrative circular may not in itself confer a vested right which can be enforceable by a writ of mandamus. Unless an order of transfer is established to be malafide or contrary to a statutory provision or has been issued by an authority not competent to order transfer, the Court in exercise of judicial review would not be inclined to interfere. These principles emerge from the judgments which have been relied upon by the appellants in support of their submissions and to which we have already made a reference above. There can be no dispute about the position in law.” 6 / 6 11. For the forgoing discussion and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned cases, challenge to order of transfer is dismissed. However, considering the submission of counsel for petitioner based on the documents enclosed along with this writ petition that child of the petitioner is studying in DPS Higher Secondary School and taking note of the fact that in the State of Chhattisgarh normally exams are to be concluded by the end of March and further that the wife of petitioner is carrying pregnancy of about six to seven months, as an interim measure it is directed to respondents to permit the petitioner to continue at the present place of posting for two months i.e. till 31 st March, 2026. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza