1 CGHC010274232026 2026:CGHC:35732 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5426 of 2026 Bhupesh Chandra Tiwari S/o Chandra Shekhar Tiwari, Aged About 37 Years Working As Cashier Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri District Bilaspur (C.G.) Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary Urban Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad Bodari District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Baloda, District Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.K. Jha, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Rohan Kumbhare, Advocate For Resp/State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, GA For Resp. No. 2 & 3 : Mr. Vibhor Goverdhan, Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 12/08/2026 1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has questioned the legality and validity of the transfer order dated 11.07.2026 (Annexure P-4), RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2026.08.14 10:46:56 +0530 2 whereby he has been transferred from Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri to Nagar Panchayat Baloda, primarily on the ground of frequent transfer. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is a Class-III employee, has been subjected to frequent transfers within a short span of time. He submits that the petitioner was earlier transferred from Nagar Panchayat Bodri to Nagar Panchayat Malhar vide order dated 26.12.2024 and thereafter from Nagar Panchayat Malhar to Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri vide order dated 18.09.2025. He further submits that by the impugned order dated 11.07.2026, the petitioner has again been transferred within a period of about 1 ½ years from the date of his joining at Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned order suffers from the vice of frequent transfer. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the impugned transfer order has been issued on account of administrative exigency and does not call for any interference by this Court. 4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. From the facts borne out from the record, it is evident that the petitioner, a Class-III employee, has been transferred thrice within a period of about two years. After his transfer from Nagar Panchayat Bodri to Nagar Panchayat Malhar vide order dated 26.12.2024, he was again transferred to Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri vide order dated 18.09.2025 and, within 3 about 1 ½ years thereafter, the impugned transfer order dated 11.07.2026 has been issued transferring him to Nagar Panchayat Baloda. 6. Though transfer is an incidence of service and the administrative authority ordinarily has the discretion to transfer an employee in the exigencies of administration, the exercise of such discretion has to be fair and reasonable. In the facts of the present case, the repeated transfers of the petitioner within a short span of time, particularly when he has been transferred again within about 1 ½ years of his joining at Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri, cannot be said to be justified merely by referring to administrative exigency. The respondents have not been able to demonstrate any compelling circumstance warranting yet another transfer of the petitioner within such a short period. This Court is, therefore, of the considered view that the impugned order warrants interference. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned transfer order dated 11.07.2026 (Annexure P-4) in respect of the petitioner, whereby he has been transferred from Nagar Palika Parishad Bodri to Nagar Panchayat Baloda, is hereby quashed and set aside. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Rahul