Transfer stayed for 30 days pending committee consideration of medical hardship representation under the transfer policy.

The petitioner, a Lecturer (L.B.) posted at Government High School, Namna, Block Udaipur, District Surguja, was transferred to the Office of the District Education Officer, Korba, under the transfer order dated 6 August 2026, where her name appeared at Serial No. 15.

She submitted that her husband was posted in the same school and that her 15-year-old daughter was suffering from a serious diabetic condition, requiring insulin three times daily and ongoing treatment at Bilaspur.

The petitioner contended that the proposed posting at Korba was approximately 155 kilometres from her existing place of posting and that Clause 8 of the applicable Transfer Policy required consideration of the medical treatment of family members.

She therefore sought permission to submit a representation before the competent Transfer Committee.

The State agreed that such representation would be considered in accordance with the applicable policy and law.

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to submit a representation under Clause 8 of the applicable Transfer Policy seeking reconsideration of her transfer on the ground of her daughter’s serious medical condition.

2. Whether the competent Transfer Committee should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation within a prescribed period, with the transfer order remaining stayed in the interim.

The Court applied Clause 8 of the applicable Transfer Policy, under which the Transfer Committee is required to consider relevant circumstances concerning the medical treatment of family members.

The Court also acted on the State’s undertaking that any representation filed by the petitioner would be considered in accordance with the applicable transfer policy and law within the stipulated period.

No statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited or applied in the order.

The Court noted the petitioner’s specific grievance that her transfer would take her approximately 155 kilometres away from her present place of posting while her daughter required regular insulin and medical treatment at Bilaspur.

Since Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy contemplated consideration of family members’ medical circumstances, the Court found it appropriate to provide the petitioner an opportunity to place her case before the competent Committee rather than adjudicate the transfer issue finally.

In light of the State’s submission that the representation would be considered under the applicable policy and law, the Court prescribed timelines for filing and deciding the representation and granted interim protection to preserve the existing position.

The Committee was directed to consider and decide the representation within 20 days of its receipt.

Until expiry of the resulting 30-day period, the operation and effect of the transfer order dated 6 August 2026, insofar as it concerned the petitioner, was stayed.

No final determination was made on the merits of the petitioner’s entitlement to cancellation or modification of the transfer.