Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:33114 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6879 of 2025 1 - Satyendra Singh Thakur S/o Late Udal Singh Thakur Aged About 44 Years R/o Hanuman Nagar, Lakhe Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) versus ... Petitioner 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District-Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Joint Director School Education Department, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector / Chairman District Rationalization Samiti Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer Tilda Nevra, District- Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Block Education Officer Dharsiva, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Manish Thakur, Advocate. For State-Respondents : Mr. K.S. Saini, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 15-07-2025 1. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition against the order dated 05.06.2025 (Annexure P-1) whereby the petitioner's services have been Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN transferred from the Govt Girls Middle School, Ravigram, to the Govt. Middle 2 School, Lakhna, Block Tilda, under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02- 08-2024 and prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ or writs for quashing/set aside the order dated 05.06.25 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent no.5. ii) Any other relief/ reliefs which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, vide transfer order dated 30-09-2022, he was transferred to the Government Girls Middle School, Ravigram, and in pursuance thereof, he joined there. Since there was an excess of teachers at Govt Girls Middle School, Ravigram, he refused to join and made a representation to the authorities to be posted elsewhere. However, under compelling circumstances, he joined there. Presently, he has been declared surplus and transferred to Govt Middle School Lakna by the impugned transfer order. Had he been adjusted at any other school in the year 2022, he would not have been declared surplus now. Without giving a proper opportunity during counselling, he was declared surplus. He has numerous family responsibilities, including caring for his old mother, whose treatment continues at Manulal Memorial Hospital, Raipur. Therefore, his transfer order is liable to be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner was transferred and posted at Govt Girls Middle School, Ravigram, on his own wish and joined there on 21-11-2022. Although he protested that he had not made any request for his transfer, he ultimately joined there and has not challenged his transfer order dated 30-09- 2022. Presently, under the rationalization instruction, he has been declared surplus and transferred. The rationalization of the petitioner, under strict compliance of the rationalization instructions dated 02-08-2024. The grounds raised by the petitioner about his difficulties are to be considered by the 3
Decision
authorities concerned. While deciding the writ petition, only the violation of the provisions of the rationalization instructions should be examined. The petitioner has already made his representation on 09-06-2025 before the authorities, and he may pursue his representation there; therefore, there are no sufficient grounds in the present writ petition, and it is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition. 5. The main grievance of the petitioner is that in 2022, when he was transferred to the Govt. Girls Middle School, Ravigram, he informed the authorities that he was an excess teacher there. If his objections had been considered at that time, he would not have been declared surplus now. Although the petitioner was transferred to Govt. Girls Middle School, Ravigram, vide order dated 30-09-2022, he did not challenge this transfer order and, after an initial objection, he joined there on 21-11-2022. Since he has joined and not challenged the transfer order dated 30-09-2022, he is to be considered posted at Ravigram School. He has rightly been declared surplus based on the rationalization instructions dated 02-08-2024 and considering the current strength and the teachers working in the school at Ravigram. The grounds raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition are not sufficient to quash the impugned transfer order. The other ground he raised is that he needs to take care of his old aged mother, whose treatment continues at Raipur, also does not appear sufficient, as the distance between Ravigram and Raipur, and Lakhna and Raipur, is not significantly different, and both places are connected to Raipur. The petitioner could not demonstrate any sufficient reason to quash the impugned transfer order in this Writ Petition. 6. It is a trite law that transfer/posting is an incident 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 4 posted anywhere at the instance of the employer in the public interest and administrative exigency. Further, it is for the government to post another person if any vacancy arises on account of the 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 do not find any scope of interference in this petition. Further, this Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere in the transfer matter. The court can interfere only in the case of proved mala fide, non-competence of authority passing the transfer order, or the transfer order not being in conformity with the rules and regulations. The petitioner/employee cannot be permitted to remain at one place forever by the Court order. It is not a case of proved mala fide, lack of competence of the officer passing the transfer order or infraction of any statutory Rules and Regulations. 7. 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 order is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil