Rahul Kachwaha vs. The State Of Chhattisgarh
Facts
The petitioner, Rahul Kachwaha, an Assistant Grade-III employee at the District Excise Officer, District Dhamtari, challenged his transfer order dated September 16, 2026, to the Office of the Excise Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, on administrative grounds. The petitioner's grievance was that the transfer order incorrectly listed his designation as Assistant Grade-III, whereas he had already been promoted to Assistant Grade-II and was working in that capacity. The State counsel, during the hearing, presented a corrigendum dated October 1, 2026, which corrected the petitioner's designation in the transfer order from Assistant Grade-III to Assistant Grade-II. This correction addressed the petitioner's sole grievance.
Held
The Court noted that the petitioner's grievance stemmed from the incorrect designation in the transfer order, where he was shown as Assistant Grade-III instead of his actual promoted post of Assistant Grade-II. The State counsel, during the hearing, placed on record a corrigendum dated October 1, 2026, which corrected the petitioner's designation in the transfer order dated September 16, 2026, from Assistant Grade-III to Assistant Grade-II. In light of this correction, the Court found that the petitioner's grievance no longer survived. Consequently, the writ petition was rendered infructuous and was accordingly dismissed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the transfer order dated September 16, 2026, is vitiated due to the incorrect designation of the petitioner as Assistant Grade-III, despite his promotion to Assistant Grade-II? The petitioner argued that the transfer order contained a factual error regarding his designation, which was contrary to his actual promotional status. This incorrect designation, he contended, rendered the transfer order flawed. The respondents, through the State counsel, did not contest the petitioner's claim regarding the incorrect designation. Instead, they submitted a corrigendum to rectify the error, implicitly acknowledging the initial mistake in the transfer order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1
CGHC010388812026
2026:CGHC:42903
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7238 of 2026 Rahul Kachwaha S/o Vijay Kachwaha Aged About 35 Years At Present Posted As Assistant Grade Iii Office At District Excise Officer District Dhamtari Resident Of House No 12 Civil Line South Dhamtari Dhamtari (M) District Dhamtari C. G.
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Commercial Taxes Excise Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur C.G. 2 - Excise Commissioner Chhattisgarh Gst Bhavan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur C. G. 3 - District Excise Officer District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 4 - Excise Commissioner Chhattisgarh Head Quarter Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Punit Ruparel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Anil Pandey, Govt. Advocate SHOAIB ANWAR SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2026.10.05 17:08:28 +0530
2 Hon'ble Shri
Bibhu Datta Guru
,
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.