1 2025:CGHC:34439 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8243 of 2025 1 - Mrs. Sunita Salam W/o Mr. Gajendra Kumar Salam Aged About 42 Years Post Teacher Local Body, Posted At Govt. Balak Ashram Pushwada, Block Kanker, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur C.G. 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, Distt.- Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G. 4 - District Education Officer, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt.- Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G. 6 - Joint Director, Education, Division Baster Jagdalpur, Distt. Baster C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 21/07/2025 1. By way of this writ petitions, the petitioner is challenging the impugned 2 transfer order and action of the respondents, whereby the petitioner has been declared surplus Teacher and consequently transferred under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not joined at her transferred place. It is further submitted 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, and if the petitioner is not granted relief, she will suffer with irreparable loss. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner still want to pursue her representation before the concerned authorities to redress her grievances. 3. Learned counsel for the State would submit that after due verification of records, the petitioner has been transferred under the Rationalization Instructions issued by the State Government. It is further submitted that, if the petitioner is having any grievance, she may move fresh representation before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee and the Committee will take a decision on her representation, 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 is directed to make a fresh representation before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee within a period of 05 days from today, and thereafter, the Committee shall decide the same within a further period of 05 days from the date of receipt of representation, in accordance with law, in objective manner. 3 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok