Chattisgarh High Court
R.S. Bhadouriya vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 September, 2025
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
Digitally
signed by
SHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
2025.09.19
10:41:05
+0530
2025:CGHC:47960-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WA No. 695 of 2025
1 - R.S. Bhadouriya S/o Shri R.P. Singh Aged About 51 Years Posted As
Assistant Grade-01, Office Of The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest
Division Marwahi, Pendraroad, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi C.G.
... Appellant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of
Forest And Climate Change, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava
Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G.
2 - Collector District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi C.G.
3 - Chief Forest Conservator Bilaspur Circle, Bilaspur C.G.
4 - Divisional Forest Officer Forest Division Marwahi, District -Gaurela-
Pendra-Marwahi C.G.
5 - Divisional Forest Officer Forest Division Dharamjaigarh, District
Raigarh C.G.
2
6 - Smt. Shail Gupta Assistant Grade-01, Forest Division Marwahi,
Pendraroad, District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi C.G.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Appellant :Shri Yogendra Chaturvedi, Advocate.
For Respondent/State :Shri Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
18.09.2025
1. Heard Shri Yogendra Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the
appellant. Also heard Shri Sangharsh Pandey, learned Govt.
Advocate for the State.
2. This writ appeal has been preferred by the appellant assailing
the order dated 03.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in
Writ Petition WPS No.10343/2025, whereby the writ petition
preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner came to be dismissed.
For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred as per
their status before the learned Writ Court.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner was initially
posted at Dharamjaigarh Forest Division on the post of Assistant
Grade-I, due to his ill health he made request to the Department
for his transfer to any other convenient place and vide 01-01-
2025 (Annexure-P/3) he was assigned the special duty at
Marwahi from Forest Division Pendraroad and thereafter, he
relieved from Dharamjaigarh Forest Divsion on 03-01-2025 and
joined there at Pendraroad Forest Division. According to the
learned counsel for the writ petitioner/appellant to
accommodate respondent No.6 the authorities have passed the
order on 11-08-2025 cancelling the attachment of the petitioner
and directed him to appear in his duties at Dharamjaigarh Forest
Division and on 18-08-2025 he was relieved for Dharamjaigarh
Forest Division. According to the learned counsel, the authorities
have considered the posting of the petitioner as attachment,
whereas, he was transferred on his own request to Forest
Division Pendraroad and assigned duty on special duty at
Marwahi, since it was not the attachment but a transfer and his
salary was also drawn from Pendraroad Forest Division,
therefore, the impugned order itself is erroneous and the same
may be quashed. According to learned counsel, the petitioner is
suffering from liver disease for which his treatment is continued
at Bilaspur hospital, therefore, considering his ailment he may
be permitted to remain there at Pendraroad Forest Division.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the learned Single
Judge has dismissed the writ petition by the order impugned and
has observed as under:-
"5. The petitioner has claimed that vide order dated 01-
01-2025 he was transferred from Dharamjaigarh Forest
Division to Pendraroad Forest Division. From perusal of
the document Annexure P/3 it transpires that he was
assigned special duty at Marwahi under the Pendraroad
Forest Division temporarily and the contents of the
order reads as under:-
"वनमंडलाधिकारी धरमजयगढ़ वनमंडल के पत्र कमांक 1687
दिनांक 31.12.2024 के माध्यम से श्री आर.एस. भदौरिया,
सहायक ग्रेड 01 के स्वास्थ्य खराब रहने के कारण धरमजयगढ़
वनमंडल से अन्यत्र स्थानांतरण हेतु प्रेषित अनुसंशा पत्र पर
सहानुभूतिपूर्वक विचार करते हुए तत्काल प्रभाव से विशेष कर्तव्य
मरवाही वनमंडल पेण्ड्रारोड में आगामी आदेश पर्यनत अस्थायी रुप
से ड्यूटी लगायी जाती है।"
6. When the petitioner was assigned duties temporarily
at Marwahi, Forest Division Pendraroad, it cannot be
said that he was transferred, but it appears that he was
attached to Forest Division Pendraroad which has been
cancelled vide order dated 11-08-2025 under the
transfer policy dated 05-06-2025. Even if it is a transfer,
the authorities have in the public interest and
administrative exigency have right to transfer the
employees as per their requirement. The petitioner
cannot claim to be remain posted at a particular place
and under the administrative exigency as well as under
the transfer policy dated 05-06-2025 he was sent back
to his original place of posting, i.e., Forest Division
Dharamjaigarh.
7. It is a trite law that transfer/posting is an incidence of
service, the Court should not interfere with the
transfer/posting order, unless there is malice,
infringement of statutory rules and regulations. The
employees may be posted anywhere at the instance of
the employer in public interest and administrative
exigency. Further, it is for the government to post
another person, if any vacancy arises on account of
transfer/posting of an employee. [see Airport Authority
of India v. Rajiv Ratan Pandey and others, 2009 (8) SCC
337 and Chief Commercial Manager, South Central
Railway, Secunderabad and others v. G. Ratnam and
others, 2007 (8) SCC 212 and also Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and
others v. State of Bihar and others, 1991 Suppl. 2, SCC
659]. Further, from the documents annexed with the
petition and the instructions submitted by the
respondents/State, this Court does not find any scope of
interference in this petition.
8. In view of the above settled legal position and also in
the facts and circumstances of the case, no case for
interference with the impugned orders is made out.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed."
5. Learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner submits that
the impugned order dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by
the learned Single Bench is erroneous and unsustainable in view
of the facts and material available on record. It is contended that
the finding of the Single Bench, treating the appellant's posting
at his present place as a mere attachment and not a regular
transfer from Forest Division Dharamjaigarh, is unjustified, since
the appellant has been drawing salary from the present place of
posting against a sanctioned vacant post, where he was
transferred on his own request. It is further submitted that the
authorities have passed orders dated 11.08.2025 and 18.08.2025
only to accommodate respondent no. 6, who, despite having
been promoted, continues to work at the same office as
Assistant Grade-I instead of being transferred. He further
submits that the learned Single Bench failed to appreciate that
the appellant is suffering from serious liver disease and was
transferred on his own request for medical reasons. It is also
argued that the cancellation of attachment orders w.e.f.
05.06.2025 under the new transfer policy cannot affect the
appellant, as the order dated 01.01.2025 by which he was
transferred to Forest Division Marwahi, Pendraroad nowhere
records that his posting was by way of attachment. Hence,
treating his service at Marwahi as attachment and transferring
him on that account is wholly erroneous and liable to be set
aside.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents/State would oppose the
submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/writ petitioner. He further submits that that vide order
dated 01-01-2025, the writ petitioner was assigned duties on
special duty at Marwahi, Forest Division Pendraroad temporarily
which has been cancelled vide order dated 11-08-2025 and he
was directed to join his duties at his original place of posting, i.e.,
Dharamjaigarh Forest Division. He would further submit that as
per the transfer policy dated 05-06-2025 all the attachments
have been cancelled w.e.f. 05-06-2025 and in that view of the
transfer policy the petitioner has to be sent back to his original
place of posting, for which the impugned orders have been
passed by the authorities. Since the order passed by the learned
Single Judge on correct appreciation of facts and law, it does not
suffer from any illegality, perversity, or jurisdictional error,
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available in the record.
8. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties, we find that the learned Single Judge has rightly held
that vide order dated 01.01.2025 the appellant was not
transferred from Dharamjaigarh Forest Division to Pendraroad
Forest Division in the strict sense, but was only assigned special
duty at Marwahi, Forest Division Pendraroad, temporarily on the
request of petitioner himself, as is evident from Annexure P/3.
The subsequent order dated 11.08.2025 cancelling such
temporary arrangement has been passed in the backdrop of the
transfer policy dated 05.06.2025, whereby all attachments stood
cancelled with effect from the said date. The order passed by the
learned Single Judge is just and proper warranting no
interference of this Court.
9. Even otherwise, it is well settled that transfer and posting is an
incidence of service, and the competent authority is fully
empowered to transfer its employees in administrative exigency
or in public interest, unless vitiated by malice or in violation of
any statutory rules, which has not been demonstrated in the
present case.
10. The scope of interference in an intra-court appeal is limited to
cases where the order of the learned Single Judge suffers from
patent illegality, perversity, or jurisdictional error. In the present
case, we find that the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed
the writ petition.
11. The writ appeal, being devoid of merits, is accordingly
dismissed at the admission stage itself.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
shoaib
