Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33633 (CHH)

VIVEK TIWARI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/7428/2025 · 2025-07-29

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7428 of 2025 1 - Vivek Tiwari S/o Shyam Sundar Tiwari Aged About 51 Years Occupation- Assistant Teacher (Lb), Government Primary School Hiranagar (Bilha), Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instruction Directorate Chhattisgarh First Floor, C-Block Indiravati Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Deputy Director Public Instruction Directorate Chhattisgarh, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Divisional Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Secretary Rationalization Committee (District Education Officer) Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner (s) : Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For State : Shri Keshav Gupta, Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 30.07. 202 5 1. Challenge in this petition is the order of transfer dated 04.06.2025 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Govt. Primary School Hiranagar (Bilha) to Govt. Primary School, Sanjay Nagar, Village Jondhra, Block Masturi, under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. 2. Learned counsel for the State, on instruction, submits that on due consideration of the representation of the petitioner, the authorities have decided to allow the representation and to cancel the posting 2 order of the petitioner dated 04.06.2025. He would also submit that order has been typed but due to some unavoidable reason it could not be signed and it will be signed and communicated to the petitioner by tomorrow. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since statement has been made by the State counsel with respect to redressal of the grievance of the petitioner, he does not want to press the present writ petition at present. 4. In view of submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder