Chhattisgarh HC Directs Review of Transfer Order for Disabled Government Employee

The Chhattisgarh High Court has stepped in to ensure that administrative transfers do not overlook the physical challenges faced by differently-abled government employees, reinforcing the need for compassionate consideration of locomotor disabilities. The Bench directed the state authorities to decide on a fresh representation from an Assistant District Public Prosecution Officer who challenged his transfer despite his 50% disability and the availability of vacant posts at his current station.

Justice Bibhu Datta Guru heard the petition filed by an Assistant District Public Prosecution Officer currently posted at District Court Bilaspur, who was aggrieved by a transfer order moving him to Rajnandgaon. The petitioner argued that his medical condition and the logistical hurdles of long-distance travel necessitated his retention at his current post, especially when vacancies existed.

Key Takeaways

Protection of Differently-Abled Employees

The ruling emphasizes that administrative authorities must specifically consider the physical limitations and mobility challenges of employees with certified disabilities when issuing transfer orders.

Rationalization of Vacancies

The decision suggests that if vacant posts are available at a current station, authorities should ideally accommodate disabled employees to prevent unnecessary hardship, provided no administrative prejudice is caused.

Mandatory Reasoned Orders

The Bench has mandated that representations involving medical grievances must be decided via speaking and reasoned orders, ensuring transparency and judicial reviewability of executive decisions.

Court Observations and Directions

During the proceedings, the petitioner highlighted his 50% locomotor disability, supported by a valid certificate, and noted that two posts of Assistant District Public Prosecution Officer remain vacant at Bilaspur. The State, represented by the Government Advocate, submitted that any fresh representation would be considered in accordance with the law.

The Chhattigarh High Court, in its reasoning, observed: “In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the challenge to the impugned transfer order, the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority, specifically bringing on record his 50% locomotor disability, medical condition and the availability of two vacant posts of Assistant District Public Prosecution Officer at District Bilaspur.”

Ratio

Administrative authorities are duty-bound to consider representations of differently-abled employees regarding transfer orders with sensitivity to their medical condition and mobility constraints. When a transfer is challenged on grounds of locomotor disability and the availability of local vacancies is demonstrated, the state must pass a reasoned and speaking order addressing these specific grievances within a time-bound period.

Background

The petitioner, working as an Assistant District Public Prosecution Officer in Bilaspur, challenged the order dated 07.09.2026, which transferred him to Rajnandgaon while posting respondent no. 3 in his place. The petitioner contended that as a person with 50% locomotor disability, he faces substantial difficulty in frequent and long-distance travel. He further highlighted that he is undergoing treatment at Bilaspur and his hometown is nearby Korba.

Advocate Shri C. Jayant K. Rao argued that the transfer was unnecessary as two posts were already vacant in Bilaspur, meaning the petitioner could be accommodated without hindering administrative efficiency. While the Chhattisgarh High Court did not quash the transfer order on its merits immediately, it granted the petitioner liberty to file a detailed fresh representation and directed the state to resolve the matter expeditiously through a speaking order.

Case Details:
Case No.: WPS No. 6775 of 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:CGHC:40532
Case Title: Chandrakant Singh Jagat v. State Of Chhattisgarh & Others
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Shri Anil Pandey, Govt. Advocate

Source: 2026 CaseBase(CTH) 17072