1 2025:CGHC:25301 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4578 of 2025 1 - Smt. Pranita Bansode D/o Shri G.S. Khobragade Aged About 46 Years W/o Shri Deepak Bansode, Working As Lecturer And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Mahud Machandur, Block A. Chowki, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - District Education Officer, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Block Education Officer, Block A. Chowki, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 5004 of 2025 1 - Pooja Dubey W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Dubey Aged About 37 Years Asistant Teacher Indu Chowk Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - District Education Officer Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.18 19:13:06 +0530 2 WPS No. 4633 of 2025 1 - Saroj Thakur S/o Shri Shulabh Thakur Aged About 37 Years Working As Lecturer (Lb) Government Higher Secondary School, Piparchhedi, Block Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh 3 - District Education Officer Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh 4 - Block Education Officer Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 18/06/2025 1. By way of these writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the impugned transfer orders and action of the respondents, whereby the petitioners have been declared surplus Teachers and consequently transferred under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that list of surplus Teachers published by the respondents is against the rationalization instructions, and the same is arbitrary as no proper opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners, and if the petitioners are not granted interim relief, they will suffer with irreparable loss. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3 3. Learned counsel for the State would submit that after due verification of records, the petitioners have been transferred under the rationalization instructions issued by the State Government. Learned State counsel would further submit that if the petitioners are having any grievance, they may move fresh representation before the concerned District Rationalization Committee, and the Committee will take a decision on their representation in accordance with law within a stipulated period. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and documents. 5. In view of submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the petitioners are directed to make fresh representation before the concerned District Rationalization Committee within a period of 05 days from today, and appear before the said Committee on 24th June, 2025. Thereafter, the Committee shall decide the representation of the petitioners within 07 days from the date of receipt of representation in accordance with law, in objective manner. Till decision on the representation is communicated to the petitioners, the impugned transfer order issued under Teacher Rationalization Instructions, so far as petitioners are concerned, be kept in abeyance. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petitions stand disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved