1 2026:CGHC:21343 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3943 of 2026 Banshidhar Dehari S/o Shri M.R. Dehari Aged About 57 Years Presently Posted As Patwari, P.H.N. 13 Banskot, Tehsil - Keshkal, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh R/o Bhalenga, P.O. Umargaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector, Kondgaon District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Keshkal, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh -- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Shreyansh Pathak, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 07.05.2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner is questioning the transfer order dated 23/04/2026, by which, he has been transferred from P.H.N. 13, Banskot to P.H.N. 18 Chhoterajpur. In the said order the name of the petitioner is at S.No.9. AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.05.08 18:37:21 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned transfer order dated 23.04.2026 is arbitrary and passed without any genuine administrative exigency, as the petitioner has been transferred thrice within 36 days. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was officially deployed for Census of India 2027 duties vide order dated 16.04.2026, and officials engaged in such statutory duties cannot be transferred during the continuance of census operations. Learned counsel further submits that the impugned transfer order is in clear violation of the circular dated 28.04.2026 issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, which specifically prohibits transfer of field-level employees deployed for Census 2027 duties till completion of the census work, rendering the impugned transfer order illegal and unsustainable in law. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the impugned order is merely a posting/transfer order issued in view of administrative exigencies. Learned counsel, on instructions, further submits that the petitioner is not discharging his duties either at his present place of posting, namely P.H.N. 13, Banskot, or in connection with Census 2027 duties. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents. 5. From perusal of the order impugned dated 23/04/2026 which was passed by the S.D.O., Keshkal, District:Kondagaon, C.G. reflects 3 that the petitioner has merely been transferred from P.H.N. 13, Banskot to P.H.N. 18, Chhoterajpur within the same Tahsil i.e. Keshkal District Kondagaon. Earlier orders dated 18.03.2026 and 01.04.2026 also pertained to postings within the same area. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to demonstrate the impugned transfer has caused any grave prejudice or the distance between the places of posting. 6. So far as the contention regarding deployment in Census 2027 duties is concerned, the assignment letter dated 16.04.2026 issued by the Tehsildar/Charge Officer, Census, Baderajpur, only indicates that the petitioner was assigned census-related work; however, the petitioner has not been transferred outside District Kondagaon. The circular dated 28.04.2026 relied upon by the petitioner does not create an absolute embargo on transfer and is not attracted in the facts of the present case, particularly when the transfer has been effected within the same district on administrative grounds. Moreover, learned State counsel, on instructions, has submitted that the petitioner is not discharging his duties either at his present place of posting or in connection with Census 2027 work. 7. It is a settled law in the matter of Union of India and others v. S.L.. Abbas reported in (1993) 4 SCC 357, wherein it has been observed by the Supreme Court that transfer is an incidence of Government service. Who should be transferred where is a 4 matter for the appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated by malafides or is made in violation of statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned order warranting interference. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Gowri/ Amardeep