1 2025:CGHC:33123 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7069 of 2025 1 - Smt. Meena Patel @ Meena Kumari Patel W/o Late Shri Suraj Kumar Patel Aged About 50 Years Workig As Teacher (L.B.) In Government Middle School Geedha, Bloxk Kharsiya, District Raigarh, C.G. R/o Housing Board Colony, Mouhapali, Kharsiya, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Joint Director School Education Department, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector-Cum-President Of The District Rationalization Committee For Rationalisation, District Raigarh. Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer-Cum-Member Secretary Of The District Rationalization Committee, Raigarh. Chhattisgarh. 6 - Block Education Officer Kharsiya, District Raigarh. Chhattisgarh. 7 - Principal/head Master Government Middle School Geedha, Block Kharsiya, District Raigarh. Chhattisgarh. 8 - Principal/head Master Government Middle School Bade Gumda, Block Gharghoda, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aman Tamboli, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Panel Lawyer VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.20 11:38:09 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice R avindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 15/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the impugned order of her posting dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure P/1), list of surplus teachers with respect to declaring the petitioner surplus at Govt. Middle School, Geedha (Annexure P/2) and order dated 20.06.2025 (Annexure P/3), whereby the petitioner has been posted at Govt. Middle School, Bade Gumda, Block Gharghoda under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024 and her representation has been rejected by the respondent No.5 and prayed for following reliefs in the writ petition:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for entire records of the case. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court be further pleased to quash the impugned order Annexure P-1, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the impugned list Annexure P-2, so far as it relates to the petitioner whereby the petitioner has been classified as surplus, in the interest of justice. 10.4 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the impugned order Annexure P-3 whereby the petitioner's representation is shown to have been rejected, so far as it relates to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.5 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the further consequential relieving order (if any) passed against the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.6 That this Hon'ble Court be further pleased to pass such other order(s) or direction(s), as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the Petitioner against the respondents including the costs of the petition under the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in the interest of justice.” 2. The petitioner, who is a Teacher (LB) (Hindi) was posted at Govt. Middle School, Geedha. The petitioner has been declared surplus and vide order dated 03.06.2025, she has been posted at Govt. Middle 3 School, Bade Gumda. 3. This is the second round of litigation. Against the posting order dated 03.06.2025, the petitioner had filed WPS No. 4980 of 2025, which was disposed of vide order dated 18.06.2025 directing the petitioner to make fresh representation before the District Level Rationalization Committee and to appear there on 24th June, 2025 and the said committee shall take a decision in accordance with law within the stipulated period, in objective manner. After passing of the order by this Court on 18.06.2025, the petitioner moved her representation on 20.06.2025 and appeared before the committee on 24.06.2025 and thereafter, before the stipulated time, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition on 29.06.2025 challenging the order dated 20.06.2025, which has been passed by the authorities on the representations of the petitioner dated 04.06.2025 and 06.06.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is a Teacher (LB) (Hindi) and the order of her posting is against the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. The petitioner has been posted at Govt. Middle School, Bade Gumda, where another teacher for the same subject is already working. She was initially classified as Arts teacher; however, she teaches Hindi in the school. In the initial list, she has been considered as Teacher (Arts), and when she made objection, she was subsequently considered as Teacher (Hindi) and has been declared surplus in the school. While considering the petitioner as Teacher (Hindi), the Headmaster of the school has also been considered as Teacher (Hindi) and the petitioner has been declared surplus, whereas the Headmaster of the school is a Teacher 4 (Arts). He would further submit that in compliance of the order dated 18.06.2025, passed in WPS No. 4980 of 2025, the petitioner moved her representation on 20.06.2025 and appeared before the committee on 24.06.2025, whereas the order (Annexure P/3) has already been passed on 20.06.2025, which itself shows the non-compliance of the order dated 18.06.2025, passed by this Court and arbitrariness on the part of the respondent authorities. All the schools having vacant posts, have not been displayed at the time of counseling and no proper opportunity was given in counseling to opt the convenient school. The seniority of the teacher has also not been considered, and therefore, the impugned order of posting of the petitioner as well as the list of surplus teachers with respect to the petitioner and the order dated 20.06.2025 may be quashed. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, on instructions, opposed and would submit that, the posting of the petitioner to Govt. Middle School, Bade Gumda is strictly under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. The petitioner as well as the Headmaster of the school were the Teacher (Hindi) and since the Headmaster cannot be rationalized, the petitioner has been declared surplus for the reason that as per the subject rotation provided under clause 7-B(5) of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024, the Headmaster comes first in Hindi subject and as per the strength of the students in the school and requirement of the teacher there, the petitioner has been declared surplus. He would further submit that in the order dated 18.06.2025, the petitioner was to appear before the committee on 24.06.2025 and the committee was to decide the 5 representation within 07 days from 24.06.2025, whereas the present writ petition has been filed on 29.06.2025 challenging the order dated 20.06.2025 (Annexure P/3), which is the order passed on the representation of the petitioner dated 04.06.2025 and 06.06.2025 made before the concerned authorities. There is no violation of Rationalization Instructions and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available in the petition. 7. The petitioner has challenged the order of posting on the ground that she is a Teacher (Hindi) and Headmaster of the school is a Teacher (Arts), whereas the Headmaster of the school has been considered as Teacher (Hindi) and he has been given priority in rotation of the subject and then, the petitioner has been declared surplus. From the document annexed with the writ petition (Annexure P/5), the subject of the petitioner as well as Mr. Dilip Kumar Patel (Headmaster of the school) is shown as Arts. In the document (Annexure P/6) issued by the Headmaster, Govt. Middle School, Geedha, the subject of Dilip Kumar Patel is shown as Arts and subject of the petitioner is shown as Hindi and a note has been appended in the said document (Annexure P/6) that “Jherh ehuk iVsy dks fgUnh fo"k; ij nkok vkifRr djus ds i'pkr~ mudk fo"k; fgUnh lkfgR; gS] ,slk crk;k x;k”. From the document (Annexure P/2) annexed with the petition, the subject of Dilip Kumar Patel, Headmaster of the school and the petitioner is shown as Hindi. It transpires that the subject of the petitioner as well as Headmaster of the school are same either it was Arts or Hindi. It is the claim of the 6 petitioner in the document (Annexure P/6) that her subject is Hindi and the subject of Headmaster is Arts, and therefore, as per clause 7-B(5) of the Rationalization Instructions, in the subject rotation the petitioner comes later after the Headmaster and she has been declared surplus. 8. It further transpires that in the earlier round of litigation, the petitioner was directed to appear before the Rationalization committee on 24.06.2025 and to make her representation and then, the committee shall take a decision on the representation of the petitioner within 07 days. The petitioner had appeared before the committee on 24.06.2025 and made her representation (Annexure P/11), but in the said representation, she has not disclosed that an order has already been passed on 20.06.2025. Before the 07 days period is over from 24.06.2025, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition on 29/30.06.2025 without waiting for the order passed on her representation as directed by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2025 in WPS No. 4980 of 2025. It further reveals that the earlier representation of the petitioner dated 04.06.2025 and 06.06.2025 has been decided vide order dated 20.06.2025. The petitioner could not demonstrate any palpable infirmity, so that the impugned order could be interfered and quashed the same. 9. Even otherwise, Rationalization Instructions are mere guidelines. It may not supplement the general powers of the employer provided under the statutory service rules, i.e. to post a person at a place in the public interest and in administrative exigency. 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, 7 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 instructions submitted by the respondents/State, this Court do not find any scope of interference in this petition. 10. 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 dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure P/1), list of surplus teachers with respect to declaring the petitioner surplus at Govt. Middle School, Geedha (Annexure P/2) and order dated 20.06.2025 (Annexure P/3) is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved