Arun Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 8183 of 2022

¶5

1 - Arun Kumar Jaiswal S/o Mooldhar Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 40 Years Presently Posted As Patwari At Phn 12 Tahsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

¶6

... Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

2 - Under Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

3 - Collector, Land Record District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

4 - Sub - Divisional Officer (Revenue) Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

		... Respondents
For Petitioner	:	Mr. Ishan Saluja, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate
For State	:	Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶14

Judgment On Board

¶15

16.06.2026

¶16

1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:-

¶17

“10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the impugned transfer order Dated 30.09.2022 issued by respondent Under Secretary, Revenue & Disaster Management (Annexure P/1).

¶18

10.2 To kindly grant any other writ/ writs, order/ orders, relief/ reliefs in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.”

¶19

2) Mr. Saluja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who is holding the post of Patwari was transferred from Patwari Circle No.12 Tehsil and District Surajpur to Collector, Land Record

¶20

2

¶21

District Balrampur-Ramanujganj vide order dated 30.09.2022. He would further submit that the petitioner has been transferred out of district, whereas, appointing authority of the petitioner is the Collector and such transfer would affect the service conditions. It is also argued that there is an interim order in favour of the petitioner. He would pray to allow this petition.

¶22

3) On the other hand, Mr. Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for State would oppose the submissions. He would submit that the transfer is an exigency of service and the Government servant has no right to remain posted at a particular place. It is also argued that the seniority of Patwari is maintained at division level and therefore, Patwari can be transferred from one district to another district.

¶23

4) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

¶24

5) Admittedly, the petitioner was transferred vide order dated 30.09.2022 and interim order is operating in his favour.

¶25

6) Taking into consideration the fact that transfer order was issued way back on 30.09.2022; there is an interim order and the petitioner was transferred outside of district, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the transfer order dated 30.09.2022 is hereby quashed. The State authorities would be at liberty to issue fresh transfer order, if exigency so arises.

¶26

7) With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of .

¶27

Sd/(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶28

Rekha

Arun Kumar Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar Jaiswal 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

Nitya Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Madhu Satnami Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Basant Kumar Ghritlahre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Avtar Dhruv Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Sharma Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Kunti Jaiswal, Vs State of Chhattisgarh