1 2025:CGHC:26061 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5285 of 2025 1 - Mahendra Kumar Loniya S/o Siyaram Loniya Aged About 42 Years Assistant Teacher (L.B), Govt. Primary School Gondaiya, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaa, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Director Public Instructions, Directorate, Indiarwati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - District Education Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 5521 of 2025 1 - Hemendra Kumar Shrivastava S/o. Late Shivmohan Lal Shrivastava Aged About 41 Years Teacher (Art), Govt. Middle School, Kanya Kota, Block - Kota, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.21 12:17:39 +0530 2 4 - District Education Officer, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s)/ State : Mr. S.P. Kale, Additional A.G. Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Deputy G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 20/06/2025 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. 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. 3 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 26th 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. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petitions stand disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved