2025:CGHC:44563 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10025 of 2025 1 - Smt. Meena Chandra W/o Ajay Kumar Chandra Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L B), At Government Primary School, Bodsara, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. 4 - District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. 5 - Block Education Officer, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur C.G. 6 - Smt. Prachi Mishra, Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, Bandhwapara Sarkanda, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri Ajay Kumar Chandra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Santosh Bharat, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 02.09.2025 1. This is the second round of litigation. In the earlier round of litigation, the writ petition filed by the petitioner against the transfer order after declaring surplus Teacher under the Teacher Rationalization Instructions, was disposed of on 20.06.2025 with liberty to move fresh representation, if already not made, Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.09.03 11:02:48 +0530 Wps 10025 of 2025 2 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 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 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 disposed of with liberty in favour of the petitioner to move/pursue his/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, in objective manner by passing a reasoned order. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma