1 2025:CGHC:43883 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10178 of 2025 1 - Girendra Raj S/o Late Santosh Raj Aged About 44 Years Head Master, Government Middle School, Achanakmar, Block Kota, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Of Public Instruction (Dpi) Through Its Director, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director School Education Division Bilaspur, (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Collector District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 22/08/2025 1. This is second round of litigation. In the earlier round of litigation the writ petition filed by the petitioner against his/her transfer order after declaring surplus Teacher under the Teacher Rationalization SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.08.30 13:16:56 +0530 2 Instructions, was disposed of with liberty to move fresh representation, if already not made, 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 Director, Public Instructions, vide notification 08.07.2025 for redressal of the grievances against the decision taken by the Divisional Rationalization Committee on the representation moved by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to move fresh representation before the Committee constituted vide notification dated 08.07.2025 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 08.07.2025. 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made by the counsel for the parties, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty in favour of the petitioner to move/pursue his/her representation to the Committee constituted under notification dated 08.07.2025 raising all the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, in an objective manner. 5. Accordingly, the present writ petitioner is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika