1 2025:CGHC:29375 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6736 of 2025 1 - Smt. Pratiksha Shrivastava W/o Shyam Nandan Shrivastava Aged About 37 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Teacher At Government Primary School, Basorpara, Block- Manendragarh, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh.- 497442 --- Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of School Education, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492002 2 - Director Directorate of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492002 3 - Collector Collector Complex, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh. - 497442 4 - District Education Officer D.E.O. Office, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh. - 497442 5 - Block Education Officer Block- Manendragarh, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh. - 497442 6 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Revenue) President Of Block Level Committee, Block- Manendragarh, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh. - 497442 --- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Devashish Tiwari, Advocate. For State-Respondents : Mr. K.S. Saini, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 01-07-2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner(s) is/are challenging the impugned transfer order(s) and action of the respondents whereby the petitioner(s) has/have been declared surplus Teacher(s) and consequently transferred under Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 the Teacher Rationalization Instructions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) would submit that the petitioner has not joined at her transferred place of posting. It is further submitted that the 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) is/are not granted relief, he/she/they will suffer with irreparable loss. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner still wants to pursue her representation before the concerned authorities to redress her grievances. 3. Learned counsel for the State would submit that after due verification of records the petitioner(s) has/have been transferred under the rationalization instructions issued by the State Government. It is further submitted that if the petitioner(s) is/are having any grievance, he/she/they may move fresh representation before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee and the Committee will take a decision on his/her/their representation(s) 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) is/are directed to make fresh representation(s) before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee within a period of five days from today and thereafter the Committee shall decide the same within a further period of five days from the date of receipt of representation(s) in accordance with law in objective manner. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil