Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2026:CGHC:15541 Date: 2026.04.09 12:04:19 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2986 of 2022 * - Ramlal Netam S/o Mudaram Netam, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village And Post Ghotpal, Ward Patelpara, Tahsil Geedam, P.S. Geedam, District :

Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Forest And Climate Change, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest Aranya Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3 - Chief Conservator Of Forest, Jagdalpur Circle Jagdalpur, Bastar Pin

494001, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

4 - Division Forest Officer Dantewada Forest Division, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

5 - Forest Range Officer, Dantewada, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

06/04/2026

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

entire records from the respondents.

the petition and issue a writ in the nature of mandamus quashing the impugned transfer order dated 18.04.2022 (ANNEXURE P-1 Colly) in respect of the petitioner.

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to work at the same place on the same post.

10.4 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate.”

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the services of the petitioner were transferred from Forest Division, Dantewada to Bijapur vide order dated 18.04.2022. He would submit that during ban period without coordination with the Chief Minister, the order impugned was passed. He would contend that as the order of transfer was passed contrary to the transfer policy, therefore, same may be quashed.

3. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents would oppose. He would submit that an interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner on 27.04.2022 which is still operative in his favour. He would contend that the petitioner has already completed more than 04 years of service by virtue of interim order and thus, this petition has become infructuous.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

5. The petitioner Class-III employee working on the post of Forest Guard was transferred from Forest Division, Dantewada to Bijapur vide order dated 18.04.2022. It appears that the order was passed during ban period without coordination with the Chief Minister. The petitioner has already enjoyed the stay order granted in his favour dated 27.04.2022. As the petitioner has worked for more than 04 years at present place of posting, therefore, in my opinion, nothing survives for adjudication.

6. It is well settled principles of law that the transfer policy is neither rule nor regulation affecting service conditions of a government servant. The policy is a guideline framed by the State Government to transfer the services of the government servants smoothly and provide them a mechanism to approach the higher authorities as and when occasion arises. Thus, no case is made for interference with the order dated

18.04.2022 (Annexure P-1), accordingly, this petition is dismissed

7. In view of the above, interim order dated 27.04.2022 granted in favour of the petitioner is hereby vacated.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

Judge

vatti