1 2025:CGHC:35796 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6052 of 2025 1 - Smt. Sevantika Rajwade W/o Ramkhelawan Rajwade Aged About 48 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.), Posted At Govt. Primary School, Lalmatiyapara, Block - Udaypur, District - Surguja (C.G.) 2 - Ramkhelawan Rajwade S/o Shri Late Shivratan Rajwade Aged About 50 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher Posted At Govt. Primary School, Kotripara, Block - Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Divisional Joint Director (Education) Surguja Division, Ambikapur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer (D.E.O.) Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer (D.E.O.) District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - Collector District Surguja (C.G.) 6 - Collector District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 7 - Block Education Officer (B.E.O.) Block - Udaypur, District - Surguja (C.G.) 8 - Block Education Officer (B.E.O.) Block - Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. A. Shandhya Rao on behalf of Mr. Shahid Ahmed Ansari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 24.07.2025 1. The petitioners have challenged the transfer order dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure-P/1), 06.06.2025 (Annexure-P/2) and 04.06.2025. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the State raised objection that two petitioners having their separate cause of action and different place of posting have filed the present writ petition. The document Annexure- P/1 is completely not readable, no any policy or circular have been annexed in support of the writ petition and therefore, the present writ petition, as framed, is not maintainable. 3. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh duly constituted petition. 4. The prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners is not opposed by the State. 5. On the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil