1 2025:CGHC:26205 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5490 of 2025 1 - Anil Prasad Gupta S/o Jagmohan Prasad Gupta Aged About 56 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (Hindi) At Govt. High School, Podaguda Block Jagdalpur, District Bastar Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Joint Director Education Division Bastar, District Bastar, Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector District Bastar, Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer Bastar, District Bastar, Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Block Education Officer Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 5581 of 2025 1 - Smt. Pramila Netam W/o Santosh Netam Aged About 49 Years Presently Working As Teacher At Govt. Boys Middle School Bacheli, Block Dantewada, District South Bastar (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.06.20 19:02:20 +0530 2 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director Education Division Bastar, District Bastar, Jagdalpur (C.G.) 4 - Collector District South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer Bastar, District South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer Dantewada, District South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prateek Singh Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer and Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 20-06-2025 1. By way of these writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the impugned transfer order and action of the respondents whereby the petitioners have declared surplus Teacher 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 are 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. 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 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 3 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 five days from today, and appear before the said Committee on 26th June, 2025. Thereafter, the Committee shall decide the representation of the petitioners within seven 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 the petitioners are concerned, be kept in abeyance. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petitions stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok