1 2025:CGHC:26158 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5431 of 2025 1 - Ramanuj Taram S/o Late Aalharam Taram Aged About 55 Years Working As Lecturer (Regular) Subject History, Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Lendara, Block Narharpur, District-Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, 3rd Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Joint Director Education Division Bastar Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) 4 - The Collector Kanker, District- Kanker (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer And Secretary District Rationalization Committee, Kanker District- Kanker (C.G.) 6 - The Block Education Officer Block And District- Kanker (C.G.) 7 - The Principal Government Higher Secondary School Lendra, Block - Narharpur, District- Kanker (C.G.) 8 - The Principal Government Higher Secondary School, Bhatpal, Block And District- Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner (s) : Shri Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For State : Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 20.06. 202 5 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 2 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 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 petitioner(s) 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 respective petitioner(s), the impugned transfer order 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 inder