1 2025:CGHC:60073 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10063 of 2025 Smt. Sarita Lahre W/o Sunil Kumar Lahre Aged About 48 Years Teacher Science (E-Cadre), Govt. Middle School Gayabai District- Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. Joint Director Education Division Durg,district- Durg (C.G.) 4. Collector District-Durg, Durg (C.G.) 5. Collector District- Rajnandgaon, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 6. District Education Officer Durg, District- Durg, (C.G.) 7. District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitesh Sahu, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyan, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 10/12/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition assailing the transfer order dated 07.06.2025 issued by respondent No.3, by which he has been transferred from Government Middle School, Gayabai, District Durg to Government Middle School, Joba block Chhuriya, Disrict Rajnandgaon in view of rationalization policy introduced by the State. SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.12.11 10:45:17 +0530 2 2. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner’s son has some medical aliment, therefore, she made representation before the respondents which has already been rejected by them. He would further submit that impugned transfer order dated 07.06.2025 as well as order dated 10.07.2025 are against the policy of rationalization, therefore, she would pray for quashing of the same. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner has already remained at present place of posting for more than 3 years now he has been declared as surplus, as there are three science teachers whereas only one science teacher is required and the petitioner is surplus employee, therefore, she has rightly been transferred. He would further submit that the transfer is incident of service and government servant cannot insist to remain posted at particular place for his entire service period. He would further submit that the rationalization policy has been introduced by the State with an object for imparting education to the students through out the State uniformly uplifting the standard of the school education and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Considering the submission that the petitioner has nowhere mention in the writ petition that since how long she is posed at particular post. On query, it has been informed by the petitioner that for last three years she is posted there and in the Durg District she is posted for last 17 years thus the entire service was spent by her in Durg District and for the first time she has been transferred to other District on account of surplus teacher. Even the petitioner is unable to point out any perversity or illegality in the impugned transfer order which warrant 3 interference by this Court as the petitioner is surplus teacher, therefore, I am of the view that the impugned order dated 07.06.2025 as well as dated 10.07.2025 does not suffer from perversity or illegality, thus the petition deserves to be dismissed and it is dismissed. No order as to cost. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge santosh