1 2025:CGHC:38205 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8456 of 2025 1 - Jyotish Choudhary S/o Harishchand Choudhary, Aged About 61 Years Working As Lecturer, Subject Commerce, Government Higher Secondary School, Block- Sirpur, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The District Education Officer, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) 3 - The Block Education Officer, Block Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) 4 - The Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Block- Sirpur, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) 5 - The Principal, Government Higher Secondary School Sukhridabri, Block- Baghbarah, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.05 17:09:21 +0530 2 01/08/2025 1. This is second round of litigation. In the earlier round of litigation the writ petition filed by the petitioner, against his transfer order after declaring surplus Teacher under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions, was disposed of on 27.06.2025 with liberty to move fresh representation before the concerned District/Divisional Rationalization Committee, 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 3 dismissed as withdrawn with liberty in favour of the petitioner to move his 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