Chhattisgarh HC Stays 400-Km Transfer Of Korba Officer With Patwari Wife Pending Committee Decision On His Plea

The petitioner, an Assistant Block Education Officer who had been serving at Korba since 2019, was transferred by order dated 3 November 2026 to Makadi, District Kondagaon, approximately 400 kilometres away; he was relieved the same day

He contended that the transfer disregarded the State Transfer Policy’s provision concerning the posting of government-employed spouses at the same place, since his wife worked as a Patwari at Deepka, Korba. He also alleged that the transfer was retaliatory because he had filed a separate writ petition challenging respondent No. 6’s posting as BEO, Korba

The State maintained that the transfer was made for administrative exigency and submitted that the petitioner could raise his grievance before the committee constituted under Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy

The petitioner sought permission to make such a representation

The Court referred to Clause 3.13 of the State Transfer Policy, which provides that, as far as possible, government-employed spouses should be posted at the same place

It also applied Clause 8, under which an employee aggrieved by a transfer may submit a grievance to the designated committee for consideration in accordance with the law and the Transfer Policy

The Court did not cite or apply any statute or judicial precedent, nor did it finally determine the legality or merits of the transfer.

In view of the significant distance between Korba and Kondagaon and the petitioner’s wife’s posting at Deepka, Korba, the Court considered it appropriate to allow the petitioner to invoke the Clause 8 process

It directed the committee to consider the representation in accordance with law and the Transfer Policy, taking the petitioner’s circumstances into account.

Given the pending challenge to respondent No. 6’s posting and the allegations of mala fides concerning the petitioner’s transfer, the Court preserved the position pending the committee’s decision by staying the transfer and consequential relieving orders insofar as they concerned the petitioner.

The petitioner was permitted to submit a representation to the Clause 8 committee within seven days; the committee was directed to decide it within a further 20 days of receipt.

The impugned transfer and consequential relieving orders, insofar as they related to the petitioner, were stayed until the committee decided the representation.