1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1250 of 2015 1 - Smt. Saroj Bajpai W/o Shri Shailendra Bajpai Aged About 44 Years Working As Udt, Govt. Girls Middle School, Mangla, R/o 404-A, Bhatia Residency, Mangla Road, Bilaspur- 495001, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. S/o Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Mantralaya, Naya Raipur- 492002, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Mungeli Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh - 495001, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The District Education Officer, Deo Office, Bilaspur- 495001, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Block Education Officer, Bilha Block, Bilha- 495220 District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. F. S. Khare, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, G. A. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput) Order on Board 19/06/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief:- 10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to accept the writ petition and pleased to decide the petitioner’s grievance. 2 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to set aside the impugned posting order dated 13.08.2014 (P-4) as far as concerned to the petitioner, letter dated 10.03.2015 (P-8) and relieving order dated 20.03.2015 (P-9) in the interest of justice. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that challenge in this writ petition is to the impugned transfer order by which the petitioner who was found to be surplus as per Rationalization Policy of the State Government dated 02.07.2014 (Annexure P-1) and was transferred from her present place of posting as Upper Division Teacher at Government Girls Middle School, Mangla to Govt. Girls Middle School, Karehapara Block Kota in the Maths subject. He further submits that the petitioner is not surplus and she has wrongly been mentioned as surplus and transferred in light of Rationalization Policy (Annexure P-1), therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State supports the impugned transfer order and submits that the petitioner was found to be surplus, therefore, her transfer order is in accordance with Rationalization Policy (Annexure P-1). 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Be that as it may, this Court on 10.04.2015 issued a notice to the respondents and passed an interim order that the petitioner be allowed to continue at her present place of posting. The interim order was continued from time to time and as on date the petitioner is still continuing on her present place of posting. After lapse of 15 years, this Court is not inclined to disturb the posting of the petitioner and therefore, the impugned transfer order so far as of petitioner is concerned, shall not be acted upon by the State. However, the State is at liberty to transfer the petitioner in future in case of any exigency arises, in accordance with law. 6. With this observation, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Parul PARUL MITTAL Digitally signed by PARUL MITTAL Date: 2025.06.23 10:24:05 +0530