1 2025:CGHC:28506 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6505 of 2025 1 - Smt. Geeta Kanwar W/o Jain Singh Aged About 39 Years Working As Teacher (Arts) At Govt. Middle School Malda (A), Block Sarangarh, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instructions, Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4 - Collector, Sakti District Sakti (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - District Education Officer Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 7 - District Education Officer Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 6518 of 2025 1 - Bhupendra Kaushik S/o Roop Narayan Kaushik Aged About 40 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary Secondary School Bhatchoura, Block - Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) 2 Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Joint Director Directorate Of Public Education, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Block Education Officer Block - Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravikar Patel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, 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. 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 3 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