The Chhattisgarh High Court, while dealing with the arbitrary promotion and transfer policy of the state government, held that an employee cannot be deprived of accrued seniority merely on account of administrative transfer in the absence of any statutory provision governing such action.
The court further remarked that Clause 5 of the impugned circular dated 31.07.2014 is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and inconsistent with the statutory provisions of Chhattisgarh Forest Service Recruitment Rules, 2012, and also the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961, and declared the said rules as ultra vires.
The aforesaid order was given by the division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal on a petition filed by Mohan Lal Ratre and similarly situated petitioners.
Read also:Â Scientific study of crowd behaviour is essential for effective crowd management: Allahabad High Court
The principle issue before the court for consideration was whether employees who have been appointed through direct recruitment and whose merit has been decided as per the prescribed statutory recruitment rules can be placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the transferee place merely because they have been transferred on executive instructions by applying Clause 5 of the Government Circular dated 31.07.2014.
Regarding seniority, the court found that
“Seniority is an important service right having a direct bearing upon promotional avenues and other service benefits. Though no employee can claim an indefeasible right to serve at a particular place, transfer is undoubtedly an incidence of service and, by itself, cannot ordinarily visit an employee with adverse civil consequences unless such consequence is specifically sanctioned by a valid statutory provision.”
Read also: Insurance Company Cannot Use Contractual Terms To Deny Welfare Compensation: Allahabad High Court
According to the facts of the case, the petitioner was appointed as a Forest Guard on 05.01.2013 through a regular recruitment process conducted under the provisions of Chhattisgarh Class III Forest Service Recruitment Rules, 2012, and thereafter initially posted in Udanti Forest Division, Gariaband.
Subsequently, on administrative grounds issued by the respondent, he was transferred on 30.07.2016 to another forest circle.
In the instant writ petitions, petitioners seek the quashing of the circular as unconstitutional and ultra vires to the provisions of Rules 14 and 15 read with Schedule IV of Rules, 2012, and also the order passed by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Bilaspur Circle, thereby rejecting the petitioner’s representation for assigning proper seniority.
The counsel for the petitioners argued that, above the mentioned rules of the Recruitment Rules, 2012, seniority and eligibility for promotion are required to be decided on the basis of merit, suitability and the prescribed statutory provisions, and it should not be on account of an administrative transfer.
It was further argued by the petitioners that the principal chief conservator of forests had given direction for the preparation of a consolidated merit list of newly appointed forest guards on the basis of marks obtained in the examination.
But their marks were not shown in the gradation lists, and thus, their seniority was incorrectly fixed.
Significantly, when verification was initiated by the Bilaspur Division, the Gariaband Division forwarded the petitioners’ respective recruitment marks.
Due to this, the petitioners found their names at a lower position, and there was a remark that they had been transferred from another circle and, consequently, ignored their original merit position.
Further, the petitioners filed representation before the respondent seeking review of their seniority, but it was rejected on 25.09.2025 by relying upon the above government circular, in which it was provided that an employee who has been transferred from one circle to another shall be placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the transferee circle.
The bench noted that
“A transfer made in public interest or on administrative exigency is an act of the employer and not of the employee. Therefore, if the employees are compelled to forfeit their accrued seniority solely because they have obeyed orders of transfer passed by the employer, such consequence would, in substance, operate as a penalty without there being any misconduct or disciplinary proceedings against them. Such a consequence, in the considered opinion of this Court, would be manifestly arbitrary and offend the guarantee of fairness embodied in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.”
On the other hand, the state submitted that the petitioner’s representation has been properly rejected and that the Recruitment Rules, 2012, govern only the process of recruitment and don’t provide the fixation of seniority upon inter-circle transfer.
The bench rejected the contention of the respondent and ruled that
“The petitioners are admittedly not persons appointed by transfer as a source of recruitment. They entered service by direct recruitment and were subsequently transferred during the course of their service on administrative grounds. Prima facie, therefore, the applicability of Rule 12(2)(b) to such a situation appears to be misplaced. Even otherwise, an executive circular cannot travel beyond the statutory rules or create consequences which are otherwise not contemplated by the governing service rules.”
Accordingly, the writ petitions were allowed, and the competent authority was directed to reconsider the petitioners’ claims for fixation of their seniority and also to determine their placement on the basis of their original merit in the recruitment process and the applicable statutory rules.
Case: Mohan Lal Ratre vs State Of Chhattisgarh and others (with connected matters)
Case No: WPS No. 13626 of 2025
Date of Order: 06.08.2026
Status:Â Allowed
