Subsequent relieving under a transfer order does not create a fresh cause to relitigate the transfer.

The petitioner challenged his transfer from Pt. J.N.M. Medical College, Raipur, to Government Medical College and Associated Hospital, Korba, in an earlier writ petition.

That petition was disposed of on 23 September 2026 with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide his representation; no stay of the transfer or deadline for deciding the representation was ordered.

The petitioner’s representation remained pending when he was relieved on 24 September 2026.

He filed the present petition, again challenging the transfer and also questioning the relieving order.

The State submitted that the earlier order was communicated to it on 25 September 2026, after the relieving order had been issued.

1. Whether the petitioner’s relieving, while his representation remained pending, gave rise to a fresh cause of action to challenge the transfer order in a second writ petition.

2. Whether the petitioner could reagitate the validity of the transfer order on substantially the same grounds after it had already been challenged in the earlier writ petition.

The Court applied the principle that a party cannot use a subsequent event to reopen a challenge to an order that was already the subject of an earlier writ petition on substantially the same grounds.

A direction to consider a representation, without an accompanying stay or interim protection and without a prescribed period for decision, does not by itself prevent the authority from implementing the challenged order.

The judgment cited no statute or precedent.

The transfer order dated 3 September 2026 had already been challenged in the earlier petition, and the present petition again sought to question its validity.

The earlier order only required the competent authority to consider the petitioner’s representation; it neither restrained implementation of the transfer nor set a deadline for deciding the representation.

Accordingly, the petitioner’s subsequent relieving did not create a fresh cause of action permitting him to relitigate the transfer.

The writ petition was dismissed.