1 2026:CGHC:21629 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3816 of 2026 Baleshwar Yadav S/o Shri Banshidhar Yadav Aged About 46 Years Presently Working As Radiographer, Community Health Centre, Udaypur, Block Udaypur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Health Services, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector, Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Block Medical Officer Community Health Centre, Udaypur, Block Udaypur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyan, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 08/05/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the order dated 13/04/2026, by which, the petitioner has been AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.05.09 15:47:19 +0530 2 relieved to Community Health Centre, Mainpat, in pursuance to the order dated 16/03/2026, passed by the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Ambikapur/respondent No.4. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned relieving order dated 13.04.2026 issued by the respondent No.5 is arbitrary and contrary to the directions passed by this Court in WPS No. 5647/2019. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the petitioner continued to discharge his duties at Community Health Centre Udaypur and no decision was ever taken by the respondent No.3 within the stipulated period as directed by this Court. In absence of any reconsidered decision by the competent authority, the respondents could not have proceeded to relieve the petitioner from his original place of posting. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is substantively posted at Community Health Centre Udaypur and is not serving on attachment/deputation basis; therefore, the general order dated 16.03.2026 issued by respondent No.4 regarding attached employees, is wholly inapplicable to the case of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the State by referring the order of this Court dated 02/08/2019 passed in WPS No.5647/2019 submits that after this order, the Collector was directed to take a decision regarding the posting to the petitioner at Udaypur as well as to the employee who was Radiographer and posted at Mainpat. The Collector has taken a decision on the basis of 3 consent of both the parties and permitted the petitioner as well as the said Radiographer posted at Mainpat, to continue in their respective place of posting. According to him, the order of the Collector permitting the petitioner and the Radiographer posted at Mainpat, itself amounts to case of attachment, hence, the impugned order which has been passed by the respondents cancelling the attachment order is just and proper. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents. 5. From perusal of the petition as well as the order impugned, it appears that the petitioner’s posting was made in the present place of posting since from the date of his appointment and subsequently, the transfer order which has been passed by the State by transferring the petitioner from Udaypur to Mainpat was questioned in a writ petition in WPS No.5647/2019 and on the basis of direction of this Court, the Collector has permitted the petitioner to work at Udaypur. Learned State counsel failed to produce any order of attachment showing the petitioner’s service attached at Udaypur. From perusal of record, it appears that the petitioner has not been attached in the present place of posting i.e. Udaypur, hence, in absence of any attachment order, the impugned order dated 13/04/2026, issued by the authorities on the basis of order dated 11/04/2026, relieving the petitioner is absolutely and not at all sustainable in the eyes of law. 4 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep