Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10387 (CHH)

USHA KIRAN DADSENA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/2805/2026 · 2026-03-26

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:14567 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2805 of 2026 1 - Usha Kiran Dadsena W/o Jai Kumar Dadsena Aged About 42 Years Presently Working As Teacher At Govt. Middle School Khorsi, Block- Pamgarh, District - Janjgir-Champa (Cg) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Cg) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Cg) 3 - The Joint Director Education Division Raipur, District Raipur (Cg) 4 - The Collector Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (Cg) 5 - The District Education Officer Janjgir-Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (Cg) 6 - The Block Education Officer Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (Cg) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Verma, Advocate For Respondents-State : Ms. Sakshi Bajpai, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 27/03 /2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- 2 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the order the impugned order dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Joint Director, Education Division, Bilaspur (C.G.) in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to correctly mark the seniority list and correction the Excess list of the teachers as per the Rationalization Scheme, considering her appointment date, and to treat him accordingly in the rationalization process, in the interest of justice. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the transfer order dated 07.06.2025 (Annexure P/2) insofar as it relates to the petitioner, being the outcome of wrongful categorization and surplus marking, in the interest of justice. 10.4 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue his posting at previous posted school, with all consequential benefits, in the interest of justice. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly further be pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to work at present place of his posting i.e. in the interest of justice. ” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner is against his transfer and posting under the Rationalization Policy, 2025. Petitioner has earlier approached the Divisional Level Committee constituted under the Rationalization Policy, 2025 by filing representation which was disposed of on 15.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents/State would submit that the petitioner is having the remedy of filing appropriate proceedings before the State Level Committee constituted under the Rationalization Policy, 2025 to consider the grievance of the employees. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner may be permitted to submit representation/appeal before the State Level Committee and direction be issued to the concerned Committee to consider and take decision on the representation at the earliest. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the respective parties, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised by the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the claim of petitioner, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation before the State Level Committee constituted under the Rationalization Policy, 2025 and if such a representation is submitted by the petitioner, concerned Committee shall consider and take decision on the representation to be submitted by the petitioner on its own merits in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 02 months from the date of receipt of representation. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY