1 2025:CGHC:22531 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4065 of 2025 1 - Smt. Harisha Sahu W/o Bhemu Ram Sahu Aged About 39 Years Occupation Teacher (L.B.), R/o Jalbihar Colony, Gali No. 6, Rudri Police Station Rudri District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 2 - Ku. Anita Sharma D/o Lakhan Lal Sharma Aged About 33 Years Occupation Teacher (L.B.), R/o Head Works Colony, Rudri Police Station Rudri, Distt. Dhamtari Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 – State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Divisional Joint Director Education Division 1 St Floor Pension Bada Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - District Education Officer Distt. Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 4 - Head Master Govt. Higher Secondary School Ban Bagod, Block Division Nagari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 5 - Head Master Govt. Higher Secondary School Siya Dehi, Block Division Nagari, Distt. Dhamtari Chhattisgarh AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.06.06 11:54:42 +0530 2 ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Patil, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. G.A. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 05/06/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent No.3 to decide the petitioner’s representation pursuant to the transfer order passed by the respondent authorities. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the impugned transfer order is against the policy dated 11/07/2017 Annexure P-5 issued by the G.A.D., therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. He would also submit that the petitioners have filed representation before the respondent authorities for redressal of their grievance vide Annexure P-6, which has not been considered and decided yet. He further submits that the respondent authorities be directed to decide the petitioners’ representation in accordance with law within a stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions, would submit that the representation filed by the petitioner will be considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and documents. 3 5. Be that as it may, the respondent authorities is directed to consider and decide the petitioners’ representation in accordance with law. In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Amardeep/Ankit