1 2025:CGHC:50676 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1413 of 2022 1 - Jayant Verma S/o Lt Jaisingh Verma Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Sond Tehsil Berla District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh), District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary School Education Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 3 - District Education Officer Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Amit Nayak, Advocate For RespondentState : Shri Soumitra Kesarwani, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 2 10/10/2025 The petitioner by way of the instant petition is seeking a direction to the respondent/State authorities to grant due recognition to the renowned freedom fighter Late Shri Madhukar Singh who had risked his life and liberty during the freedom struggle for India’s independence. The petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondents authorities to consider the long standing demand of the local residents and the elected representatives to rename the Government High Secondary School, Village Sind, Tehsil Berla, District Bemetara in the name of Late Shri Madhukar Singh. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the grandson and lineal descendant of Late Shri Madhukar Singh. It is submitted that Late Shri Madhukar Singh had actively participated ion the freedom struggle and had at great personal risk, removed the Union Jack from the Government Higher Secondary School Sahaspur Lohara then under the control of the British Government and hoisted the Tricolor flag with Charkha symbolizing the national movement. It is contended that for his act of valor and sacrifice, Late Shri Madhukar Singh was imprisoned and subjected to torture by the British authorities. Subsequently his name was duly included in the official list of recognized freedom fighters maintained by the State Government. He was also accorded State honors and was invited to grace various official functions post independence. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after his demise, there was a consistent demand from the local residents and the gram panchayat, Village Sond to name the Government Higher Secondary 3 School after him. The gram panchayat had even passed a unanimous resolution in this regard, which was duly forwarded to the concerned authorities. It is further submitted that the Member of the Parliament representing the constituency had also taken up the matter with the State authorities but no action has been taken till date. 4. The petitioner issued a legal notice dated 07.07.2021 seeking appropriate consideration fo the said demand. In reply thereto, vide letter dated 23.07.2021, the respondents expressed their inability to accede to the request to rename the school. 5. Learned State counsel submits that the decision regarding naming or renaming of government educational institutions lies with in the domain of the policy discretion of the State government. It is further submitted that the representation made by the petitioner and others was duly considered by the competent authority and upon examination of the existing policy and administrative considerations, it was not found feasible to rename the school. Hence, no cause of action survives for judicial interference. 6. Upon perusal of the record and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that the issue raised pertains to a matter of administrative and policy decision of the Government. The renaming of a public institution is within the exclusive domain of the State, which must take into account various factors, including historical, social and administrative implications. 7. While the Court acknowledges and records the immense contribution of Late Shri Madhukar Singh, in India’s freedom struggle and his sacrifices formation, it is equally well settled that no writ of 4 mandamus can be issued to compel the Government to take a particular policy decision unless it violates constitutional or statutory rights. 8. In the present case, the petitioner has not demonstrated any legal or statutory right that has been infringed nor any arbitrariness or mala fide in the decision of the authorizes. The claim, though based on sentiments deserving respect does not constitute a justiciable cause for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court finds no merit in the present petition. With the above observation the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.10.15 18:45:25 +0530