1 CGHC010315852026 2026:CGHC:36785 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6205 of 2026 Smt. Shipra Biswas W/o Shri Pradeep Biswas Aged About 56 Years Occupation Service Posted As Lecturer Government Higher Secondary School Block Koyalibeda, District North Bastar Kanker C.G. R/o P V. -46, Ward No. 1, Pakhanjur, District North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Capital Complex, Naya Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director Directorate of Public Instructions Raipur District Raipur C.G. 3 - Divisional Joint Director Jagdalpur Education, Division Jagdalpur District Bastar C.G. 4 - Collector Kanker District North Bastar Kanker C.G. 5 - District Education Officer, Kanker District North Bastar Kanker C.G. 6- District Education Officer, Bijapur, Distt. Bijapur, C.G. 7 - Block Education Officer, Koyalibeda, District North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, GA (Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru) Order on Board 18/08/2026 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2026.08.20 10:50:35 +0530 2 1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner is challenging the transfer order dated 06.08.2026 issued by the Respondents whereby the service of the petitioner has been transferred from Government Higher Secondary School, Matoli, Block Koyalibeda, District North Bastar Kanker to District Bijapur i.e. about 289 KM away from the present place of posting. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is aged more than 56 years and as per transfer policy she ought not to have been again transferred to a core scheduled area without taking her consent. He would next submit that the husband of the petitioner is currently working at the same place. He would next submit that in place of the petitioner no one has been posted in her place, therefore, the post would become vacant and studies of the students would be affected. He would lastly submit that the petitioner as well as her husband are suffering from old age diseases therefore, they both are required each other company, therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order dated 06.08.2026 may be quashed. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that under Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025, a specific mechanism has been provided for redressal of grievances arising out of transfer orders. Any employee aggrieved by a district or State level transfer order is entitled to approach the Committee constituted under the policy within the prescribed period, whereupon the grievance is to be examined and appropriate recommendation made to the competent department. Therefore, an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, this Court finds that Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025 specifically provides for constitution of a Committee to examine grievances against transfer orders. The policy envisages that an aggrieved Government servant may submit a representation before the said Committee, which shall examine the grievance and make appropriate recommendations to the concerned department for passing suitable orders. Since the grievance raised by the petitioner pertains to his transfer and non-consideration of his request under the husband-wife adjustment policy, the same can appropriately be examined by the Committee constituted under the Transfer Policy. 5. In view of the availability of the aforesaid statutory/administrative mechanism, this Court is not inclined to examine the merits of the petition in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. Accordingly, the liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Committee constituted under Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025 by filing an appropriate grievance/representation along with all relevant documents within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and in the event such a grievance is preferred, the Committee shall consider and decide the same in accordance with the Transfer Policy within a period of 25 days from the date of receipt of the representation. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the 4 merits of the petitioner's claim, and all questions are left open to be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations and liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE ashu