SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 4243

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
VIVEK KUMAR SONI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WA/22/2026



2026:CGHC:2948-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 22 of 2026 Vivek Kumar Soni S/o C R Soni Aged About 35 Years Village And Post Aasra, Tahsil Dongargaon, Ps Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ROHIT KUMAR ... Appellant CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT versus KUMAR CHANDRA

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Health and Family Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - Commissioner Cum Director Directorate Of Health Services North Block, Sector 19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

4 - Collector District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

5 - Block Medical Officer Community Health Centre, Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

6 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

7 - Under Secretary General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellant : Mr. Pankaj Singh, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

19 .01 .2026

1 Heard Mr. Pankaj Singh, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents.

2 By way of present writ appeal under Section 2 of Sub-Section (1)

of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench Act, 2006, the appellant / writ petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.11.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No.12996 of 2025 (Vivek Kumar Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

3 Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the appellant / writ petitioner has filed a writ petition being WPS No. 12996 of 2025, assailing the order dated 30.06.2025 issued by respondent No. 4/Collector by which he has been transferred from Primary Health Centre, Arjuni Development Block Dongargaon District Rajnandgaon to Primary Health Centre, Buchatola, Development Block Churia, District Rajnandgaon on the administrative ground. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 07.10.2025 by which the Committee constituted by the State for deciding the representation has rejected the representation filed by the petitioner.

4 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge erred in law and on facts in dismissing the writ petition, as the impugned transfer order dated 30.06.2025 and the recommendation made by the Committee upholding the same vide order dated 07.10.2025 were passed in utter violation of the policy in vogue as the post held by the petitioner is not of District Cadre, hence, respondent No.4 is not competent to issue the impugned order. He would further submit that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that the Committee deciding his representation has not taken into consideration the ground raised by the petitioner and has mechanically without application of mind has rejected his representation. He would further submit that the petitioner’s mother is suffering from cancer and no one in his family to look after his mother and would pray for quashing of the impugned order dated 25.11.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, the impugned transfer order 30.06.2025 issued by respondent No. 4/Collector as well as the order dated 07.10.2025 passed by the Committee upholding the impugned transfer order.

5 On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the aforesaid submission and submitted that the transfer order dated 30.06.2025 issued by Respondent No. 4, the Collector, is within his compet

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top