2025:CGHC:46081 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8945 of 2025 Yogendra Singh Rajput S/o Shri Khedu Singh Rajput Aged About 45 Years Teacher Science Government Middle School Bhandarkhol, Block- Pali, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary School Education Department , Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur , Atal Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Public Instruction Directorate Naya Raipur Atal Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector And Chairman District Level Rationalization Committee, District- Korba (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer District- Korba (C.G.) 5 - Block Education Officer Block Pali, District- Korba (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri Anil Singh Rajput, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri S Choubey, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 10.09.2025 1. Petitioner has filed this petition against the order dated 17.07.2025 (Annexure P2), passed by the Collector, by which, the petitioner, who was working as Teacher (Science) at the Government Middle School Bhandarkhol, Block-Pali has been transferred to the Government Middle School, Jalke, Block-Podi Uproda, District-Korba, under the Rationalization Scheme, framed by the State Government. Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.09.11 10:38:57 +0530 Wps 8945 of 2025 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that from bare perusal of Annexure P1 dated 30.06.2025, in fact, one Smt Madhu Rajput was declared Surplus but instead of her, present petitioner has been transferred, which is against the Policy. Thus, he would pray for quashing of impugned order (Annexure P2) dated 17.07.2025. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has preferred representation on 17.07.2025 before respondent-4, District Education Officer, Korba, which is still pending. 3. The submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently opposed by the learned State counsel, and would draw attention of this Court to Clause-10, sub-Clause-6 of the Policy subsequent policy dated 28.04.2025 according to which, a probationer cannot be declared as ‘Surplus’, unless and until his probation is completed. In view of the fact he would pray for dismissal of the petition. 4. Considering the fact that petitioner has already made a detailed representation, which is pending consideration before the authorities concerned, petitioner would be permitted to file representation afresh before the authorities again, raising all his grievances, and in the eventuality of the same, it may be decided within a stipulated time frame. 5. Considering the limited prayer by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make representation afresh, before the Divisional Committee constituted pursuant to the Clause mentioned in the Policy, which would decide the representation within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Wps 8945 of 2025 3 6. It is made clear that this Court has not commented anything on merits of the case, and the representation of the petitioner, so filed shall be decided on its own merits. 7. Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of. 8. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE padma