1 2025:CGHC:28524 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6536 of 2025 1 - Bhojram Sahu S/o Hariram Sahu Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Parsadakala, Fingeshwar, Tahsil- Rajim, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary School Education Department, Mantralay Mahanadi Bhavan, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Rationalization Committee District- Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Balaudabazar, District Raipur, Now Balaudabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Chhura, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer Block- Chhura, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) 7 - Block Education Officer Block- Mainpur, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) 2 WPS No. 6618 of 2025 1 - Jitendra Kumar Sahu S/o Bhagirathi Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village - Shyamnagar, Post Office - Baronda, Tahsil - Rajim, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhavan, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Rationalization Committee, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Nagari, District - Dhamtari (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer Block - Chhura, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 7 - Block Education Officer Block - Mainpur, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal 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. 3 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. 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 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. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika