1 2025:CGHC:28432 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6391 of 2025 1 - Jyotish Choudhary S/o Harishchandra Choudhary Aged About 61 Years Working As Lecturer, Subject Commerce, Government Higher Secondary School, Sirpur Vikaskhand, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The District Education Officer District - Mahasamund (C.G.) 3 - The Block Education Officer Block - Sirpur Vikaskhand (C.G.) 4 - The Principal Government Higher Secondary School, Sirpur Vikaskhand, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) 5 - The Principal Government Higher Secondary School, Block, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Panel Lawyer 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 27-06-2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner(s) is/are challenging the impugned transfer order(s) and action of the respondents whereby the petitioner(s) has/have been declared surplus Teacher(s) 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 petitioner(s) and if the petitioner(s) is/are not granted interim relief, he/she/they will suffer with irreparable loss. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) further submit that the petitioner(s) has/ have not joined in his/her/their transferred place of posting till date. Therefore, the impugned order(s) is/are liable to be set aside. 3. Learned counsel for the State would submit that after due verification of records the petitioner(s) has/have been transferred under the rationalization instructions issued by the State Government. It is further submitted that if the petitioner(s) is/are having any grievance, he/she/they may move fresh representation before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee and the Committee will take a decision on his/her/their representation(s) 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) is/are directed to make fresh representation(s) before the 3 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(s) in accordance with law in objective manner. Till representation(s) of petitioner(s) is/are decided, there shall be status quo as it exists today so far as transfer of present petitioner(s) is/are concerned. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika