1 CGHC010341952022 2026:CGHC:35565 NAFR NIRMALA RAO HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7215 of 2022 1 - Ravi Kumar Patel S/o Bhaiya Lal Patel Aged About 35 Years Presently Posted And Working As Patwari At Tahsil Office, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, R/o Near Patal Bhairvi Mandir, New Hall, Ward 19, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District-Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director, Land Record Indrawati Bhawan, First Floor, Block No. 2, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Armaan Memon, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Syed Majid Ali, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Vivek Mishra, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the impugned transfer dated 30.09.2022 2 (Annexure P-1), so far as it relates to transfer of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue his services at the present place of posting.

10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem-fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the services of the petitioner were transferred from the Tehsil Office, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, to the Office of the Collector, Land Records, District Khairagarh, vide order dated 30.9.2022. He would submit that, although no application was submitted by the petitioner, the transfer order records that the petitioner was transferred on his own request. He would further submit that the petitioner was transferred outside the district and, therefore, the order of transfer is bad in law. It is also contended that an interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner on 10.11.2022. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that Khairagarh was earlier a part of District Rajnandgaon and, therefore, the services of the petitioner were transferred within the territory of the erstwhile District Rajnandgaon. Accordingly, this ground is not available to the petitioner. He would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 5. A perusal of the order (Annexure-P/1) makes it clear that the services 3

of the Patwaris were not transferred at their own expense; rather, it was specifically observed that the cost of transfer would be borne by the transferred employees themselves. Therefore, the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. 6. Having considered the fact that the services of the petitioner were transferred from one district to another district, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is hereby quashed. The State shall be at liberty to take an appropriate decision with regard to the transfer of the services of the petitioner, if the exigencies of service so require. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi

1 CGHC010341952022 2026:CGHC:35565 NAFR NIRMALA RAO HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7215 of 2022 1 - Ravi Kumar Patel S/o Bhaiya Lal Patel Aged About 35 Years Presently Posted And Working As Patwari At Tahsil Office, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, R/o Near Patal Bhairvi Mandir, New Hall, Ward 19, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District-Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director, Land Record Indrawati Bhawan, First Floor, Block No. 2, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Armaan Memon, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Syed Majid Ali, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Vivek Mishra, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the impugned transfer dated 30.09.2022 2 (Annexure P-1), so far as it relates to transfer of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue his services at the present place of posting.

10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem-fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the services of the petitioner were transferred from the Tehsil Office, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, to the Office of the Collector, Land Records, District Khairagarh, vide order dated 30.9.2022. He would submit that, although no application was submitted by the petitioner, the transfer order records that the petitioner was transferred on his own request. He would further submit that the petitioner was transferred outside the district and, therefore, the order of transfer is bad in law. It is also contended that an interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner on 10.11.2022. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that Khairagarh was earlier a part of District Rajnandgaon and, therefore, the services of the petitioner were transferred within the territory of the erstwhile District Rajnandgaon. Accordingly, this ground is not available to the petitioner. He would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 5. A perusal of the order (Annexure-P/1) makes it clear that the services 3

of the Patwaris were not transferred at their own expense; rather, it was specifically observed that the cost of transfer would be borne by the transferred employees themselves. Therefore, the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. 6. Having considered the fact that the services of the petitioner were transferred from one district to another district, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is hereby quashed. The State shall be at liberty to take an appropriate decision with regard to the transfer of the services of the petitioner, if the exigencies of service so require. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi