1 2026:CGHC:24621 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4530 of 2026 1 - Dilip Kumar Rathore S/o Baharta Ram Rathore Aged About 58 Years Posted As Secretary, Gram Panchayat Munun Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Additional Charge As Secretary Of Gram Panchayat Pendri (Jan) Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Department Of Panchayat Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 4 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 6 - Ramesh Soni Secretary Posted As Gram Panchayat Pacheda Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Addl. A.G. with Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.06.18 17:54:17 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 18/06/2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 14/05/2026 passed by the respondent No.5, whereby the respondent No.6 has been transferred as Secretary from Gram Panchayat Pacheda to Gram Panchayat Pendri (Jan.) where the petitioner is already having the additional charge for the said post. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, by the impugned order dated 14.05.2026, the additional charge of Gram Panchayat Secretary, Village Pendri (Jan.), has been withdrawn from the petitioner and assigned to respondent No. 6. According to the petitioner, the posting of respondent No. 6 at Village Pendri is contrary to the circular issued by the State Government on 16.09.2009, which stipulates that a Gram Panchayat Secretary shall not be posted in his home village. Learned counsel further submits that since respondent No. 6 is a resident of Village Pendri and has been posted in the same village, the order impugned is contrary to the aforesaid circular. 3. Learned State counsel, ex adverso, submits that there is no illegality in the said impugned order. The posting of a Secretary or the withdrawal of additional charge of a particular Gram Panchayat falls within the discretion of the State Government or respondent authorities. Even, the petitioner has no right to challenge the posting of respondent No. 6. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents. 5. Having considered the submission advanced by learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the impugned order, it reflects that the impugned order only withdraws the additional charge previously given to the petitioner and assigns it to respondent No. 6. The authority to post an employee at a particular place or withdraw additional charge lies with the State Government and the respondent authorities. Further, the petitioner cannot challenge the posting of respondent No. 6, as the posting or transfer of another employee is under discretion with the State Government or respondents authority. Therefore, the challenge to the posting of respondent No. 6, who is transferred from the Gram Panchayat Pacheda to Gram Panchayat Pendri (Jan.), is without any substance and there is no illegality & irregularity in the order impugned. 6. As a result, the present petition is dismissed. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep