1 2025:CGHC:31113 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6708 of 2025 1 - Smt. Vandana Sahu W/o Shri Sandeep Sahu Aged About 39 Years Presently Working Lecturer - Commerce In Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amlidih, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Divya Sharma D/o Shri U.C. Trigunayat Aged About 35 Years Presently Working Lecturer - Commerce In Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amlidih, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Directorate Of Public Instructions (Dpi) Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Joint Director School Education Department, Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - District Education Officer (Deo) Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aman Upadhyay, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. S.P. Kale, Additional A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice R avindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.07 20:05:41 +0530 2 30/06/2025 1. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition against the impugned transfer order dated 05.06.2025 under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024 and prayed the following reliefs in the writ petition:- “10.1 It is therefore prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/order/direction in nature of mandamus whereby to set aside/quash the impugned Orders dated 05.06.2025 (ANNEXURE P/1 & ANNEXURE P/2) issued by the Respondent District Education Officer Raipur whereby the services of the Petitioners have been transferred under the Scheme of rationalisation. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/order/direction in nature of mandamus whereby to direct to the Respondent No. 4 to take decision on the pending representation made by the Petitioners strictly in accordance with law. 10.4 That, Any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are presently posted as Lecturer (Commerce) and posted at Govt. 3 Higher Secondary School, Amlidih, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur. Under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024, the petitioners are declared surplus and the petitioner No.1 Smt. Vandana Sahu has been transferred to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tohda, Block Tilda and the petitioner No.2 Smt. Divya Sharma has been transferred to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Satbhanva, Block Tilda vide the impugned transfer order dated 05.06.2025. He would further submit that the Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amlidih vide its letter dated 03.06.2025 informed the authorities about the number of students and teachers posted there and as per the information, total 547 students and 11 teachers are there in Amlidih school. As per the instructions issued on 12.05.2025, the respondent No.2 (Annexure P/3) for commerce subject one post sanctioned for every 30 students and 03 additional posts of Lecturer (Commerce) would be fixed for 105 to 135 students in commerce subject, yet the petitioners have been declared as surplus teacher there. By the transfer of the petitioners, the teaching activities badly affected in the school, as there is shortage of commerce teacher in the school. The Principal of the Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amlidih has also wrote a letter on 03.06.2025 to quash the transfer order of the petitioners as their services are required at Amlidih school. They have also made their representation before the authorities on 12.06.2025 and 18.06.2025, but the same has not been considered till date, hence this petition. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, on instructions, would submit that the petitioners were posted at Govt. 4 Higher Secondary School, Amlidih in commerce subject and in view of the clause 7(c) and 10 of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024, the petitioners have been declared as surplus there and they have been transferred to other schools. The service benefits of the petitioners are not affected and transfer is one of the service conditions, therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned transfer order of the petitioners, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available in the petition. 5. The petitioners, who are the Lecturer (Commerce) in Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amlidih have assailed their transfer orders, which have been issued under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. Clause 7(c) of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024 provides the number of lecturers to be posted in the school as per the strength of the students as well as the subject periods, which reads as under:- “C. हाई/ हायर सेके ण्डरी स्कू ल :- 1. हाई/हायर सेके ण्डरी स्कू ल में जहां दज संख्या बहुत कम है, और वहाँ एक ही विवषय के दो व्याख्याता कायरत है (प्रतित व्याख्याता अध्यापन 04 कालखण्ड से कम), तो उनमें से कविनष्ठतम अतितशेष होगा। 2. हायर सेके ण्डरी स्कू ल में स्वीकृ त विकसी संकाय में एक भी छात्र/छात्रा अध्ययनरत् नहीं है, तो ऐसी स्थिस्7तित में संबंति8त संकाय के व्याख्याताओं को जिजन स्कू लों में उस संकाय के छात्र अध्ययनरत् है, वहां समायोजिजत विकया जायेगा। 5 3. हाई/हायर सेके ण्डरी स्कू लों में स्वीकृ त पद के विवरूद्ध एक से अति8क व्याख्याता कायरत होने पर दोनों में से जो कु विनष्ठ होगा उसे अतितशेष माना जायेगा। 4. विवकासखण्ड स्तरीय सविमतित उपरोक्त विनद?श अनुसार अतितशेष व्याख्याताओं की सूची एवं विवद्यालयवार पद रिरक्तता की सूची तैयार करेगी।” 6. The petitioners are unable to demonstrate as to violation of any condition of Rationalization Instructions either clause 7(c) or clause 10 of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. The posting of the lecturers on the basis of strength of the students and subject periods are to be decided by the authorities concerned and the petitioners cannot claim as a matter of right to be posted there. 7. 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 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 submissions made by the respondents/State, this Court do not find 6 any scope of interference in this petition. 8. 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 orders are made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved