1 2026:CGHC:26467 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4858 of 2026 Prakhar Pandey S/o Late Rajesh Prasad Pandey Aged About 46 Years Working On The Post Of Lecturer (Physics) Subject Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Pali Block Pali Distt- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector- Korba Distt- Korba (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director, Education Division Bilaspur, Distt- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Pali Distt- Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 30/06/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashment of transfer order dated 18.06.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.06.30 17:33:36 +0530 2 respondent No.4/ District Education Officer, District Korba, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pali, Block Pali, District Korba to Swami Atmanand Upgraded Hindi Medium School, Tiwarta, Block Pali, District Korba. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide impugned order dated 18.06.2026, the services of the petitioner have been attached and he has been posted at Swami Atmanand Upgraded Hindi Medium School, Tiwarta, Block Pali, District Korba. He submits that the impugned order is contrary to the transfer policy of the State Government, which prohibits attachment of Government employees except with the approval of the Head of the Department/In-charge Secretary as contemplated under Clause 3.17 of the Transfer Policy. Learned counsel further submits that Swami Atmanand Schools are managed by a society and posting of Government employees therein can only be made on deputation with the consent of the concerned employee, whereas in the present case, the petitioner has been posted without obtaining his consent. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is holding the post of Lecturer and the District Education Officer is not the competent authority to pass such an order. He also submits that the petitioner's wife is suffering from mental illness and is undergoing regular treatment at the State Mental Hospital, Sendri, Bilaspur, and therefore, the impugned posting would cause serious hardship to the petitioner. Thus the 3 impugned order is arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the Government policy and liable to be set aside. 3. Learned State counsel, while supporting the impugned order, submits that an altercation had taken place between the petitioner and the Principal on 16.06.2026, due to which the educational environment was disturbed. Therefore, the order dated 18.06.2026 has been passed purely as a temporary administrative arrangement to maintain a peaceful atmosphere and ensure smooth academic functioning of the school. Pending further action by the competent authority, the petitioner has only been directed to discharge his duties at Swami Atmanand Upgraded Hindi Medium School, Tiwarta, on a temporary basis, and therefore, no interference is called for. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. From perusal of the impugned order dated 18.06.2026, it is evident that the petitioner has not been transferred or sent on deputation to Swami Atmanand Upgraded Hindi Medium School, Tiwarta. Rather, the impugned order itself records that, in view of the altercation which took place between the petitioner and the Principal on 16.06.2026, resulting in a disturbed atmosphere in the school, the petitioner has been directed, purely as a temporary arrangement, to discharge his duties at the aforesaid institution so as to maintain academic discipline and ensure smooth functioning 4 of the school. The order further makes it clear that the arrangement is temporary in nature and shall remain operative till a final decision is taken by the competent authority or until further orders. 6. The contention of the petitioner that the impugned order amounts to deputation or attachment in violation of Clause 3.17 of the Transfer Policy or that his consent was mandatory for such arrangement does not merit acceptance in the facts of the present case. The order has been passed purely as an interim administrative measure in the interest of maintaining a congenial academic atmosphere in the school and cannot be construed as a regular transfer or deputation. The administrative exigencies are within the domain of the employer and, unless shown to be vitiated by mala fides or in violation of any statutory provision, ordinarily do not warrant interference. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality, arbitrariness or jurisdictional error in the impugned order dated 18.06.2026 warranting interference. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, is dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE $. Bhilwar