2025:CGHC:28442 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6443 of 2025 Padmini Patel D/o Kalaram Patel Aged About 49 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Primary School, Purena, Cluster-Barpali, Block- Kartala, District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Joint Director Education Division Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Collector Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 6 - The Block Education Officer Kartala, District Korba (C.G.) ...Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri RK Verma, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Ajit Singh, GA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 27.06.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned transfer order and action of the respondents whereby the petitioner has been declared surplus Teacher, and consequently transferred under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the list of surplus Teachers published by the respondents is against the rationalization instructions and the same Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.06.28 10:25:50 +0530 Wps 6443 of 2025 2 is arbitrary, as no proper opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner, and if the petitioner is not granted interim relief, he/she will suffer with irreparable loss. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has not joined in his/her transferred place of posting till date. 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 petitioner has been transferred under the rationalization instructions issued by the State Government. It is further submitted that if the petitioner is having any grievance, he/she may move fresh representation before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee, and the Committee will take a decision on his/her 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 is directed to make fresh representation 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 in accordance with law in objective manner. Till representation of the petitioner is decided, there shall be status quo as it exists today, so far as transfer of present petitioner is concerned. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma