1 2025:CGHC:42534 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9119 of 2025 1 - Smt. Sunita Sahu W/o Mani Ram Sahu Aged About 43 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.), At Govt. Boys Middle School Kosmanda, Block Balod, District Janjgir-Champa, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 3 - Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, C.G. 4 - Collector District Janjgir-Champa, C.G. 5 - District Education Officer Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, C.G. 6 - Block Education Officer Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa, C.G. 7 - Block Education Officer Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G. 8 - Principal Govt. Boys Middle School Kosmanda, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa, C.G. ---- Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice R avindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.25 18:14:29 +0530 2 21/08/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the impugned order dated 07.06.2025 and relieving order dated 10.06.2025 (Annexure P/1) and also order dated 21.07.2025 (Annexure P/7), whereby the petitioner, who is Teacher (Science) has been earlier posted at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela under the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024 and her representation has been rejected by the respondent No.3 and prayed for following reliefs in the writ petition:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in relates to the case of the petitioner from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and set aside the transfer order dated 07.06.2025 & relieving order dated 10.06.2025 (Annexure-P/1 colly), and rejection order dated 21.07.2025 (Annexure P/7) in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief's in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. The petitioner, who is a Teacher (Science) was posted at Govt. Boys Middle School, Kosmanda, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa, has been posted at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela vide order dated 07.06.2025. In pursuance to the order dated 07.06.2025, she was relieved on 10.06.2025, and when she refused to accept her relieving order, the same has been served through WhatsApp of her mobile phone on 16.06.2025. The petitioner challenged her order of posting 3 by filing WPS No. 5280 of 2025, which was disposed of vide order dated 19.06.2025 directing the petitioner to submit her fresh representation before the concerned Rationalization Committee and to appear there on 25th June, 2025 and the said committee shall take a decision in accordance with law within the stipulated period, in objective manner. After passing of the order by this Court on 19.06.2025, the petitioner made her representation on 23.06.2025 and she was provided opportunity of hearing and thereafter, her representation was rejected vide order dated 21.07.2025 (Annexure P/7). After rejection of the representation, the petitioner again filed the present writ petition. 3. In the present writ petition, on 05.08.2025, the State counsel was directed to seek instructions with respect to the posting of the Teacher (Science) at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela, as there was already the excess teacher. In compliance of the do 05.08.2025, learned counsel for the State, on instructions, submitted that on the wrong information submitted by the District Education Officer and Block Education Officer, certain irregularities have been detected and the District Education Officer has been suspended and the department is going to correct the order of the petitioner very soon. On 21.08.2025, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the State would further submit that the petitioner was again called for counseling on 14.08.2025 and she was given option of 60 schools of district Sarangarh Bilaigarh, where the posts of Teacher (Science) are vacant, but she has not chosen to those schools. Thereafter, as per clause 10.1 of Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024, she is allotted 4 single teacher school i.e. Govt. Middle School, Dabhra, Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh and directed to join there in the said school and the order has been passed on 20.08.2025. A copy of the order dated 20.08.2025 is being submitted by the State counsel, which is taken on record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, there is complete violation of Rationalization Instructions. At the time of initial counseling, the entire schools have not been displayed. There is vacant post available at Govt. Middle School, Kamreed and Govt. Middle School, Bhojpur and she may be posted within the Janjgir-Champa district. He would further submit that for the fault committed by the authorities, the petitioner cannot be punished by posting her to another place and she was deprived to chose the convenient school of nearby places. Her husband is posted as Headmaster at Govt. Middle School, Kharwani, District Korba, which is adjoining to the place of her present posting and she may be given priority to be posted at the same place on the humanitarian ground of posting of husband and wife at the same place. Taking action against the authorities and amending her place of posting, itself shows that the irregularities committed by the authorities while posting of the petitioner, and therefore, the impugned orders dated 07.06.2025, 10.06.2025 and 21.07.2025 may be quashed. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, on instructions, opposed and would submit that, upon inquiry certain irregularities have been found against the District Education Officer and Block Education Officer and action has been taken against them, for which the District Education Officer has been suspended. Due to 5 wrong information, the petitioner was posted at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela, where no vacant post was available. The petitioner was called for counseling on 18.08.2025 through the notice dated 14.08.2025 and she was given option of 60 schools at district Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, where the post of Teacher (Science) was vacant, but she denied to choose the schools, and therefore, she is posed at Govt. Middle School, Dabhra, Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh vide order dated 20.08.2025. As per the available vacant post, the petitioner is now being posted at Govt. Middle School, Dabhra and since the order dated 07.06.2025 is amended, her grievance in the present writ petition with respect to her posting at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela is redressed and no relief can be granted to her in the present writ petition. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available in the petition. 7. The petitioner has challenged the order of posting dated 07.06.2025 (Annexure P/1) and order dated 21.07.2025 (Annexure P/7) rejecting her representation on the ground that there was no vacant post of Teacher (Science) at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela, and if she joined there, she again would be surplus at Baramkela school. The grievance of the petitioner was examined by the respondent No.3 and it is found that certain irregularities have been committed by the District Education Officer and Block Education Officer, for which the District Education Officer has been suspended. From the instructions submitted on 21.08.2025, it further transpires that in the process of correction of the posting order of the petitioner, she was called for 6 counseling on 18.08.2025 and gave her option of 60 schools of district Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, where the posts of Teacher (Science) are vacant, but she refused to opt the schools, therefore, in view of clause 10.1 of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024, the petitioner was posted at single teacher school i.e. Govt. Middle School, Dabhra, Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh vide order dated 20.08.2025. Though by the earlier order, the petitioner was posted at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela, but the same is amended and her place of posting is changed after giving opportunity to opt the schools, where vacant posts are available. For the irregularities committed by the District Education Officer, he has already been suspended, and thus, I do not find any palpable infirmity in the amended posting order of the petitioner dated 20.08.2025. Even otherwise, by amending the order dated 07.06.2025 and passing the order dated 20.08.2025, the grievance of the petitioner with respect to her posting at Govt. Middle School, Baramkela is now over. 8. Even otherwise, Rationalization Instructions are mere guidelines. It may not supplement the general powers of the employer provided under the statutory service rules, i.e. to post a person at a place in the public interest and in administrative exigency. It is a trite law that transfer/posting is an incidence of service, the Court should not interfere with the transfer/posting order, unless there is malice, infringement of statutory rules and regulations. The employees may be posted anywhere at the instance of the employer in public interest and administrative exigency. Further, it is for the government to post another person, if any vacancy arises on account of transfer/posting of 7 an employee. [see Airport Authority of India v. Rajiv Ratan Pandey and others, 2009 (8) SCC 337 and Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and others v. G. Ratnam and others, 2007 (8) SCC 212 and also Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and others v. State of Bihar and others, 1991 Suppl. 2, SCC 659]. Further, from the documents annexed with the petition and the instructions submitted by the respondents/State, this Court do not find any scope of interference in this petition. 9. In view of the above settled legal position and also in the facts and circumstances of the case, no case for interference with the impugned order dated 07.06.2025 and relieving order dated 10.06.2025 (Annexure P/1) and also order dated 21.07.2025 (Annexure P/7) is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved