1 / 3 CGHC010312052026 2026:CGHC:36503 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6168 of 2026 Smt. Namrata Nandurkar Pandey W/o Shri Anilesh Pandey Aged About 37 Years Occupation Assistant Programmer, Office Of Commissioner, Land Records, Chhattisgarh, R/o H I G 69/301, Sector 29, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of C.G. Through Its Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, C. G. 3 - The Commissioner, Land Records, Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, First Floor, Block No. 2, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, C.G. 4 - Director, Land Records, Chhattisgarh, Office of The Commissioner, Land Records, Indrawati Bhawan, First Floor, Block No. 2, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, C.G. 5 - Joint Secretary, Transfer Committee, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Sr. Adv. Along with Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Anuja Pandey, Dy. GA along with Ms. Poorva Tiwari, PL ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2026.08.19 10:32:12 +0530 2 / 3 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru) Order on Board 17/08/2026 1. The grievance of the petitioner is that by the impugned transfer order dated 04.08.2026, thirteen out of twenty-six working Assistant Programmers posted at the State Headquarters have been transferred to various districts and the petitioner has been directed to work at District Dhamtari and has been assigned the additional charge of District Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh which is arbitrary and contrary to the Government Transfer Policy, particularly Clauses 3.15 and 4.1. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been issued during the transfer-ban period without the requisite approval and in excess of the permissible percentage prescribed under the Transfer Policy. He would next submit that immediately after issuance of the impugned order, the petitioner submitted a representation before the competent authority pointing out the aforesaid infirmities. The petitioner is presently on sanctioned Maternity Leave and, therefore, seeks protection till her representation is considered and decided. 3. Learned State counsel submits that, if the representation of the petitioner is pending, the same may be directed to be considered and decided within a stipulated period. 4. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the grievance, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority/Committee constituted under the Transfer Policy to consider 3 / 3 and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and the applicable Transfer Policy, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within twenty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. Considering that the petitioner is presently on sanctioned Maternity Leave, the effect and operation of the impugned transfer order dated 04.08.2026, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, shall remain stayed till the decision on her representation. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE ashu