SMT ANNAPURNA CHANDRAVANSHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
WPS/6222/2022 · 2026-07-02
Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24860 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24860 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2026:CGHC:27447
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6222 of 2022 1 - Smt Annapurna Chandravanshi W/o Shri Bharat Chandravanshi Aged About 50 Years Occupation Rural Health Organizer, R/o Primary Health Centre, Sirri, Block Kurud,
District
:
Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Rekha Kosariya W/o Dinesh Kumar Kosariya Aged About 35 Years Occupation- Ward Female, Primary Health Centre, Nari, Block Kurud, District : Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh 3 - Hitendra Netam S/o Shri Kawal Singh Netam Aged About 42 Years Occupation Pharmacists, R/o Community Health Centre, Bhakara, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health, Mahanadi Bhavan Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Department Of Health, Indirawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District
:
Raipur,
Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Dhamtari Dhamtari District- Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Dhamtari District- Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 5 - Block Medical Officer Civil Hospital, Kurud, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) NIRMALA RAO
2 For Petitioner/s : Shri T.K. Jha, Senior Advocate alongwith Shri Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri T.L. Bareth, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Judgment On Board 03.07.2026 1) The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:
“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition filed by the petitioners and direct the respondent authorities not to treat transfer order dated 27.11.2021 (Annexure P/1) as a punishment. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to treat the aforesaid transfer order as a punishment in their CR and the same may not cause any effect in their promotion. 10.3 Any other relief/relief's which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be allowed.” 2) Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners would submit that the services of the petitioners were transferred from Primary Health Centre, Jamgaon to Primary Health Centre, Korra; Primary Health Centre, Nari and Sub-Health Centre, Joratarai by respondent No.4 vide order dated 27.11.2021. He would submit that complaints were made against the petitioners and the concerned authority/ respondent No.4 recorded a finding that the petitioners failed to maintain social harmony and improve their
3 behaviour towards general public and they repeated such acts. He would submit that no opportunity of hearing was afforded and no show-cause notice was issued, therefore, the observations made by respondent No.4 are not sustainable in the eyes of law. 3) Learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the
submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. He would submit various complaints were received against the petitioners and in their presence, certain observations were made, pursuant to which, the services of the petitioners were transferred. He would contend that the petitioners have already complied with the transfer order dated 27.11.2021 and therefore, the present petition has rendered infructuous. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5) With regard to order of transfer, as the petitioners have already joined at the transferred place of posting, no relief can be granted. However, certain observations have been made against the petitioners in the transfer order dated 27.11.2021. Therefore, the petitioners are granted liberty to submit a detailed representation before respondent No.4 and the said authority is directed to consider the representation(s) in an objective manner and take an appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law. It is a well- settled principle of law that no adverse order can be passed against a civil servant without affording any opportunity of hearing.
4 Respondent No.4 shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 6) Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi