1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10605 of 2025 1 - Mithlesh Kumar Singh S/o Gautiya Ram Aged About 37 Years Working As Assistant Teacher L.B., At Primary School Dumarpani, Block Shankargarh, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Public Instruction Directorate First Floor, C-Block, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The District Education Officer Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Block Education Officer Block Shankargarh, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujgain, Chhattisgarh. 6 - The Secretary Rationalization Committee Cum Distt. Education Officer, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navneet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 12/09/2025 SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.09.15 10:05:22 +0530 2 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 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 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 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. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika