1 2025:CGHC:40677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9392 of 2025 1 - Smt. Chandravali Chandrakar W/o Shri Yugal Kishor Chandrakar Aged About 34 Years R/o- Village And Post- Chourel, Thasil- Arjunda, District- Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Block No. 3, First Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director Education Division- Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) 4 - The Collector District- Durg (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) 6 - Mr. Harnarayan Sahu Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. High School, Borgaon, Block- Dondi And District Balod (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate. For State-Respondents : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 12-08-2025 1. This is second round of litigation. In the earlier round of litigation the writ petition filed by the petitioner against her transfer order after declaring surplus Teacher under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions, was Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 disposed of with liberty to move fresh representation and in turn the District 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 move/pursue 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 Aadil