IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11208 of 2026 Manas Chandra Behera …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Mishra, Advocate -versus- Union of India and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI along with Mr. D. Harichandan, CGC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 01.05.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard Mr. S.K. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned DSGI along with Mr. D. Harichandan, learned CGC appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore humbly prayed that; this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs quashing the order of transfer dated 22.12.2025 under Annexure-3 and the order of rejection dated 10.02.2026 as per Annexure-5 And further be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner to continue in Group Centre, C.R.P.F., Bhubaneswar for a period of one year ahead for complete recovery from his ailment.” 4. It is contended that Petitioner while continuing in service when he was put under transfer vide order dtd.22.12.2025 under Annexure-3, he made a detailed representation under Annexure-4 with a prayer to cancel the same. But without assigning any reason whatsoever, Petitioner’s claim has been rejected vide the impugned order under Annexure-5 dtd.10.02.2026. 4.1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since while rejecting the Petitioner’s claim vide the impugned order, no reason has been assigned and it is a non-speaking one, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is accordingly contended that Petitioner’s claim is required to be considered afresh with passing of a reasoned and speaking order. 5. Learned DSGI though supported the impugned order, but failed to satisfy this Court that any reason has been assigned while rejecting the claim of the Petitioner so made under Annexure-5. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submission made and since it is found that no reason has been assigned while rejecting the representation filed by the Petitioner under Annexure-2 against the impugned order of transfer dtd.31.12.2025, this Court on that ground only, is inclined to quash the same. While quashing the impugned order dtd.10.02.2026, this Court remits the matter to Opp. Party No. 4 to take a fresh decision on the Petitioner’s claim with passing of a reasoned and speaking order. 6.1. Since it is fairly contended that all such order of transfer has been kept in abeyance till 15th May, it is expected that a fresh order will be passed before the said date. 7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev