Santosh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:17799

¶3

SOURABH BHILWAR

¶4

Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.04.21 10:40:11 +0530

¶5

NAFR

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MCC No. 372 of 2026

¶8

Santosh Kumar S/o Shri Aatmaram Aged About 53 Years Working As Assistant Food Officer, Balod, R/o House No. 566, Gandhi Nagar, P.O Nehru Nagar Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶12

2 - Special Secretary Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

3 – Director, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies, Indravati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶14

4 – Collector, District Balod Chhattisgarh

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. Satish Gupta, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Anand Gupta, Dy. Govt. Advocate

¶18

2

¶19

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU)

¶20

Order on Board

¶21

20/04/2026

¶22

The petitioner/ applicant preferred the instant MCC for modification of the order dated 30-04-2024 passed in WPS No.4095 of 2019.

¶23

(a) L earned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid writ petition was filed challenging the transfer order dated 20.02.2019 passed by respondent No.2, whereby the petitioner was transferred from District Balod to District Bijapur. He submits that an interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner, which continued till disposal of the writ petition on 30.04.2024. On the said date, the writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous on the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner that due to efflux of time, no grievance survived. Thereafter, vide letter dated 15.01.2026, the Director (Directorate of Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Protection Department, Raipur has insisted the Collector, District Balod to execute the said transfer order dated 20.02.2019.

¶24

(b) Learned counsel further submits that once the writ petition stood disposed of as infructuous, the respondents ought not to insist upon implementation of the transfer order passed in the year 2019 which was under challenge, though the State may be at liberty to pass a fresh order, if so required.

¶25

3

¶26

Per contra , learned State counsel submits that the order dated 30.04.2024 was passed on the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without consent of the State, therefore, the same cannot be modified by way of the present MCC.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the material available on record.

¶28

From perusal of the documents and the pleadings, it appears that the transfer order in question is of the year 2019 and an interim order granted in favour of the petitioner continued for nearly five years till disposal of the writ petition on 30.04.2024. Though the writ petition was disposed of on the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel was present and did not raise any objection at that stage.

¶29

Be that as it may, considering the fact that the interim protection remained in operation for a substantial period, the efficacy of the transfer order dated 20.02.2019 has substantially vitiated. In such circumstances, it would not be appropriate for the State to insist upon execution of the said order at this stage. However, the State is not prevented from passing a fresh order of transfer, if so warranted in accordance with law and in case any administrative exigency arises.

¶30

Accordingly, the present MCC is disposed of with the modification that “the respondents shall not insist upon execution of the transfer order dated 20.02.2019 which was under challenge

¶31

4

¶32

in WPS No.4095 of 2019.” It is, however, made clear that the State/respondents shall be at liberty to pass a fresh transfer order, if exigencies of service so require.

¶33

A copy of this order be placed on the record of WPS No.4095 of 2019 and shall be read along with the order dated 30.04.2024 passed therein.

¶34

Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE

¶35

$. Bhilwar

Santosh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramnarayan Vs Vishal Ram

Ramavtar Soni Vs Amanulla

Jethmal Kotadia (Jain) Vs Kanhiyalal Kotadia

Shyamlal Vs Guharam Sidar

Fagudas Vaishnav Vs Kunjram

Chandu Bhai Chawla Vs G L Shivarao