1 2025:CGHC:23249 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4409 of 2025 1 - Abhimanyu @ Abhimanyu Jaiswal S/o Shri Arjun Jaiswal Aged About 34 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Science) In School Education Department, Posted At Government Primary School Bhedimuda 2, Ratanpur, Block Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, R/o Juna Para, Village Pondi, Post Pondi, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director School Education Department, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, C.G. 4 - Collector District Bilaspur, C.G. 5 - District Education Officer Bilaspur, C.G. 6 - Block Education Officer Kota, District Bilaspur, C.G. 7 - Principal/ Head Master Government Primary School Bhedimuda 2, Ratanpur, Block Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 8 - Principal/ Head Master Government Primary School Bhilaoni, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Aman Tamboli, Advocate. For State : Shri SP Kale, Additional Advocate General along with Shri Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate and Shri Suyash Dhar, Dy. Govt. Advocate. VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.11 19:42:15 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 11.06.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner(s) is/are challenging the impugned transfer order and action of the respondents whereby the petitioner(s) have been declared surplus Teacher and consequently transferred under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) 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 petitioner(s) and if the petitioner(s) are not granted interim relief, they will suffer with irreparable loss. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 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. He would further submit that if the petitioner(s) 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 petitioner(s) are directed to make fresh representation before the concerned District Rationalization Committee by 13th June, 2025 and appear before the said Committee on 16th June, 2025. Thereafter, the Committee shall decide the representation of the petitioner(s) within seven days from the date of receipt of representation in accordance with law in objective manner. Till representation of the petitioner(s) are decided, the impugned transfer order 3 issued under Rationalization Instructions, so far as petitioner(s) are concerned, be kept in abeyance. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved