1 2025:CGHC:35921 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7932 of 2025 1 - Lalaram Dewangan S/o Lt. Buddhuram Dewangan Aged About 56 Years Posted As Lecturer Sanskrit At Government High School Gohrapadar Block- Mainpur District Gariyaband C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of School Education At- Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director National Mission For Secondary Education At 2nd Floor Ekikrit Shiksha Bhawan Pension Bada Raipur C.G. 3 - District Education Officer Gariyaband District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 4 - Block Education Officer Gariyaband District Gariyaband C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 24/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the impugned order dated 05.09.2018 (Annexure P/1) and the list of surplus teachers issued by the office of District Education Officer, Gariyaband (Annexure VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.10.27 18:54:47 +0530 2 P/2) and order dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure P/7), whereby the petitioner has been posted from Govt. High School, Joba, Block Gariyaband to Govt. Higher Secondary School, Gohrapadar, Block Mainpur under the Rationalization Instructions and prayed for following reliefs in the writ petition :- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 05.09.2018 of P/1 issued by respondent no. 03 DEO whereby the setup of high school Joba District Gariyaband has been changed and consequently quash the shortlist of P/2 vide which the petitioner has arbitrarily and without rationale been shortlisted as a surplus lecturer, further as a consequence, the transfer order of Annexure P/7 may please also be quashed by this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the respondent No.3 has changed the setup of the school, for which he was not competent. By order dated 05.09.2018, the setup of the school has been changed and thereafter as per the changed setup, the petitioner has been declared surplus at Govt. High School, Joba and has been posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Gohrapadar. The petitioner is a Lecturer (Sanskrit) and by his posting at Gohrapadar school, there would be no teacher in Sanskrit, and therefore, the posting of the petitioner is arbitrary and against the Rationalization Instructions. He would further submit that vide order dated 25.06.2011 and 29.01.2011, the Middle School, Joba and other school were upgraded into High School and the ratio of Principal and Lecturers were fixed as 1:6, but 3 vide order dated 05.09.2018, the fixed ratio has been changed by the respondent No.3 and under the changed setup, the petitioner has been declared surplus. Since, the changed in the setup itself is arbitrary and without authority, the rationalization of the petitioner is also arbitrary and in violation of provisions of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. He would fairly submits that the petitioner has joined at his place of posting i.e. Govt. Higher Secondary School, Gohrapadar, yet, he is challenging his order of posting and changed setup of the school. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, on instructions, would submit that, the respondent No.3 has not changed any setup of the school, but only communicated the information about the upgraded schools vide its communicated dated 05.09.2018 to all the Block Education Officers of District Gariyaband. The setup of the school has been fixed by the Rastriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) and it has been informed that by the letter dated 20.01.2015, issued by the Rajya Madhyamik Shiksha Mission, the appointments on the post of one Principal, five Lecturers, one Science Teacher and one Office Assistant should be filled-up up to 30.05.2014 and if till that date, the Teachers are not appointed, no one shall be appointed on that post in future. There is no infirmity or arbitrariness in the impugned order of posting of the petitioner dated 02.06.2025 and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available in the petition. 5. The main ground of challenge in the present writ petition is that, the 4 respondent No.3 has changed the setup of the school for which he was not competent. From perusal of the letter dated 05.09.2018 (Annexure P/1), it is quite vivid that it is only a communication to the Block Education Officers of District Gariyaband regarding setup of the upgraded schools under the RMSA by referring the letter issued by the Rajya Madhyamik Shiksha Mission dated 20.01.2015. From perusal of the letter dated 05.09.2018, it further transpires that, the setup of the schools has been fixed by the Rastriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) and it has been informed that by the letter dated 20.01.2015, issued by the Rajya Madhyamik Shiksha Mission, the appointments on the post of one Principal, five Lecturers, one Science Teacher and one Office Assistant should be filled-up up to 30.05.2014 and if till that date, the Teachers are not appointed, no one shall be appointed on that post in future. It is not that the respondent No.3 has changed the setup of the school, but it was a decision taken by the Govt. of India and Rajya Madhyamik Shiksha Mission, Raipur. It has also been informed that, it has been decided by the Govt. of India in its meeting dated 26.05.2015 that, the posts of Science Teacher/Accountant/Office Assistant/ Assistant Grade-III in the upgraded schools under RMSA is abolished. From perusal of the letter dated 05.09.2018, it is nowhere mentioned that the respondent No.3 has changed the setup of the school, but it is only a communication of the decision taken by the Govt. of India with respect to the schools under the RMSA. There is no arbitrariness or illegality on the part of the respondent No.3 in communication dated 05.09.2018. Further, the petitioner has challenged the letter dated 05.09.2018, which is after about 07 years, which is highly belated. 5 Further, the petitioner could not demonstrate any ground, so that it can be considered that the letter dated 05.09.2018 is arbitrary. From the material produced by the petitioner in the present writ petition, this Court does not find any sufficient ground to interfere with the impugned order of posting of the petitioner or any violation of the Rationalization Instructions dated 02.08.2024. Further, the petitioner has already joined at his place of posting in compliance of the order dated 02.06.2025. 6. Even otherwise, Rationalization Instructions are mere guidelines. It may not supplement the general powers of the employer provided under the statutory service rules, i.e. to post a person at a place in the public interest and in administrative exigency. It is a trite law that transfer/posting is an incidence of service, the Court should not interfere with the transfer/posting order, unless there is malice, infringement of statutory rules and regulations. The employees may be posted anywhere at the instance of the employer in public interest and administrative exigency. Further, it is for the government to post another person, if any vacancy arises on account of transfer/posting of an employee. [see Airport Authority of India v. Rajiv Ratan Pandey and others, 2009 (8) SCC 337 and Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and others v. G. Ratnam and others, 2007 (8) SCC 212 and also Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and others v. State of Bihar and others, 1991 Suppl. 2, SCC 659]. Further, from the documents annexed with the petition and the instructions submitted by the respondents/State, this Court do not find any scope of interference in this petition. 6 7. In view of the above settled legal position and also in the facts and circumstances of the case, no case for interference with the impugned orders dated 05.09.2018 (Annexure P/1), list of surplus teachers issued by the office of District Education Officer, Gariyaband (Annexure P/2) and order dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure P/7) are made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved