1 2025:CGHC:35014 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8034 of 2025 1 - Smt. Sushma Meshram Wife Of Chandrashekhar Meshram Aged About 47 Years Working As Teacher (L.B.) Govt Middle School Badhaitiola Block Khairagarh District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya Atal Nagar New Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instructions Indravati Bhawan Atal Nagar New Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Joint Director Education Division Durg District Durg (C.G.) 4 - The Collector District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.) 6 - The Block Education Officer Khairagarh District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.) ---- Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice R avindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.24 12:00:58 +0530 2 22/07/2025 1. This is second round of litigation. In the earlier round of litigation the writ petition filed by the petitioner against his/her transfer order after declaring surplus Teacher under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions, was disposed of on 16.06.2025 with liberty to move fresh representation, if already not made, and in turn the District/Divisional Rationalization Committee was directed to decide the same within specific time period. Now this petition has been filed after rejection of representation filed by the petitioner. 2. The counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the State Government has now constituted another Committee headed by the Divisional Commissioner vide notification dated 07.07.2025 for redressal of the grievances against the decision taken by the District/Divisional Rationalization Committee on the representation moved by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to move fresh representation before the Committee constituted vide notification dated 07.07.2025 and the Committee be directed to decide the same within stipulated time period. 3. Learned counsel for the State does not have any objection if such a direction is given to the said Committee constituted under notification dated 07.07.2025. 4. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty in favour of the petitioner to 3 move/pursue his/her representation to the Committee constituted under notification dated 07.07.2025 raising all the grievances and the Committee, in turn, shall decide the same on its own merits in accordance with law as early as possible. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved