High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 10 CHH CK 1388

Rajkumar Tamboli vs The State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors.

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur · Decided on 8 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bibhu Datta Guru, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
WPS No. 7355 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 338 words
1.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has assailed the impugned transfer order dated 29.09.2026, whereby he has been transferred from the post of Additional Collector, District Janjgir-Champa, to District Narayanpur on administrative grounds. He submits that the petitioner had undergone kidney transplantation in the year 2021 and requires regular medical treatment at Apollo Hospital, Bilaspur. His transfer to Narayanpur would cause serious hardship in continuing the said treatment and is also contrary to Clause 1.10 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025. He further submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation dated 29.09.2026 before the respondent No. 1 seeking modification of his place of posting on medical grounds. He, therefore, prays that the said representation may be directed to be considered and decided in accordance with law. He further prays that, till a decision is taken on the said representation, the petitioner may be permitted to continue at District Janjgir-Champa.

2.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that, pursuant to the impugned transfer order, respondent No.5 has already joined at the place of posting of the petitioner. He submits that, if the representation of the petitioner is pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law within a stipulated period. However, at this stage, no interim protection may be granted in favour of the petitioner.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

4.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the pending representation dated 29.09.2026 submitted by the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law and the applicable Transfer Policy, preferably within a period of 25 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.

With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of.