1 2025:CGHC:36443 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5691 of 2025 1 - Ramdas Manikpuri S/o Shri Hemdas Manikpuri Aged About 45 Years Lecturer Chemistry (L.B.) Swami Aatmanand Utkrisht Hindi Medium Higher Secondary School Chhindpur, Block Katghora, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Public Instruction Directorate, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Deputy Director Public Instruction Directorate, Chhattisgarh, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Block Education Officer Block Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Singh Rajput, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice R avindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.29 11:37:58 +0530 2 01/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the impugned transfer order dated 12.06.2025 (Annexure P/4), whereby the petitioner, who is the Lecturer (LB) (Chemistry) has been transferred from Govt. Higher Secondary School, Chhindpur, Block Katghora, District Korba to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Talnar, Block Chhindgarh, District Sukma under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024 and he prayed the following reliefs in the writ petition:- “(i) That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ or writs for quashing/set aside the order dated 12.06.25 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent no.3. (ii) Any other relief/reliefs which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed. An affidavit in support is being filed herewith.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is a Lecturer (LB) (Chemistry) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Chhindpur, Block Katghora, which is presently known as ‘Swami Atmanand Utkrisht Hindi Medium Higher Secondary School, Chhindpur, Block Katghora’. The petitioner was posted there on deputation vide order dated 27.09.2023 and now under the Rationalization Instructions, he has been declared surplus there and has been transferred to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Talnar, District Sukma. At the time of counseling, on 12.06.2025, the petitioner raised objection before the respondent No.2 that he is on deputation at 3 Swami Atmanand Utkrisht Higher Secondary School, Chhindpur and his name is not there in the list of surplus Lecturers, therefore, he cannot be considered to be surplus, yet he has been declared surplus and transferred. He made his representation before the respondent No.2 and raised objection that as per clause 2.14 of the Rationalization Instructions, the Swami Atmanand Utkrisht Hindi/English Medium Higher Secondary Schools/P.M. Shree Schools’ will not be adjusted, yet the petitioner has been declared surplus, but the representation of the petitioner has not been considered, therefore, the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is liable to be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, on instructions, would submit that the rationalization of the petitioner and his transfer is under the strict compliance of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. At Swami Atmanand Utkrisht Hindi Medium Higher Secondary School, Chhindpur, two Lecturers (Chemistry) were working, out of which one Smt. Vimla Kanti Janardan had joined in the school on 23.05.2018, whereas the present petitioner Ramdas Manikpuri had joined on 28.08.2019, therefore, he being the junior, has been declared as surplus. He would further submit that it is the Swami Atmanand Schools and P.M. Shree Schools, would not be merged, but it is not there that the teachers/lecturers of that schools are also exempted from their rationalization. Swami Atmanand Schools and P.M. Shree Schools are not merged, but the teachers/lecturers are rationalized. Further, the consent of the concerned lecturer is required only when they are proposed to be 4 posted at Swami Atmanand School or P.M. Shree School on deputation. In the present case, they have been transferred from Swami Atmanand School to the Govt. Higher Secondary School, for which their consent is not required. The petitioner refused to opt the school on 12.06.2025 at the time of counseling and his representation dated 07.06.2025 has been rejected by the respondent No. 5. The petitioner could not demonstrate any arbitrariness or mala fide in the impugned transfer order and the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material annexed with the petition. 5. The petitioner, who is a Lecturer (LB) (Chemistry) was posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Chhindpur and has been transferred to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Talnar. His claim is that he is posted at Swami Atmanand Hindi Medium Higher Secondary School and he cannot be declared surplus as he is on deputation and Swami Atmanand Schools are exempted from its merger. From perusal of clause 2.14 of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024, it transpires that only Swami Atmanand Hindi/English Medium Schools and P.M. Shree Schools are exempted from its merger. It is nowhere mentioned that the Teachers/Lecturers posted at Swami Atmanand Schools or P.M. Shree Schools are also exempted from their rationalization. The petitioner being the junior than the other Lecturer (Chemistry) posted in the school, has been declared surplus and has been transferred. From the document (Annexure P/3), it also reveals 5 that the petitioner has refused to opt the school at the time of counseling on 12.06.2025. Further, from the document annexed with the petition, filed on 23.06.2025 through covering memo, it further transpires that the petitioner was asked to submit his representation before the District Rationalization Committee, Korba. It is also not the case that the petitioner is sending on deputation to Swami Atmanand School, for which his consent is necessary, but it is a case, where he has been transferred from Swami Atmanand School and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Talnar. The petitioner could not demonstrate any palpable infirmity or mala fide on the part of the authorities concerned, which makes him entitled for the reliefs claimed. The ground raised by the petitioner that he has been transferred on erroneous ground, would not be sufficient to quash the transfer order dated 12.06.2025. 6. Even otherwise, Rationalization Instructions are mere guidelines. It may not supplement the general powers of the employer provided under the statutory service rules, i.e. to post a person at a place in the public interest and in administrative exigency. It is a trite law that transfer/ posting is an incidence of service, the Court should not interfere with the transfer/posting order, unless there is malice, infringement of statutory rules and regulations. The employees may be posted anywhere at the instance of the employer in public interest and administrative exigency. Further, it is for the government to post another person, if any vacancy arises on account of transfer/posting of an employee. [see Airport Authority of India v. Rajiv Ratan Pandey 6 and others, 2009 (8) SCC 337 and Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and others v. G. Ratnam and others, 2007 (8) SCC 212 and also Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and others v. State of Bihar and others, 1991 Suppl. 2, SCC 659]. Further, from the documents annexed with the petition and the instructions submitted by the respondents/State, this Court do not find any scope of interference in this petition. 7. In view of the above settled legal position and also in the facts and circumstances of the case, no case for interference with the impugned order is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved