1 2026:CGHC:7251 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1547 of 2026 Rajendra Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Motiram Sahu Aged About 40 Years Teacher (L.B.), Govt. Middle School Jamul, Block Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Public Instructions, Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Divisional Joint Director (Education) Durg Division, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - District Education Officer Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Diksha Gouraha, Dy. G.A. SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.02.11 11:07:32 +0530 2 HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU Order on Board 10/02/2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs: a. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) and order dated 16.06.2025 (Annexure-P/2). b. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 07.06.2025 (Annexure-P/3), whereby the petitioner has been declared surplus under the Rationalization Scheme of the Government and Posted at Government Middle School Chakravay, Block Nawagarh, District: Bemetara (C.G.) c. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work in the Government Middle School Jamul, Block Durg, District: Durg (C.G.) 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by order dated 07.06.2025, the petitioner has been posted from Government Middle School Jamul, Block Durg, District: Durg to Government Middle School Chakravay, Block Nawagarh, District: Bemetara (C.G.). Against the said order, the petitioner approached this Court by filing WPS No. 4484 of 2025, which has been decided by this Court on 16.06.2025 granting liberty to the petitioner to make fresh representation before the District Rationalization Committee and the said committee was directed to decide the same. Learned counsel would submit that thereafter, pursuant to the order of this Court, the petitioner approached the District Rationalization Committee and submitted his grievance, however, without considering the same, the committee declined to consider the 3 case of the petitioner by order dated 16.06.2025. Against the said order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Divisional Rationalization Committee but the said authority also declined to consider the case of the petitioner by order dated 17.09.2025. On account of the impugned action on the part of the authorities, the petitioner and his family members are facing several problems. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the aforesaid submission of the petitioner and would submit that the District Rationalization Committee and Divisional Rationalization Committee considered the case of the petitioner that too after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and observed that since there is no provision to post the couple at the same place of posting and even also there is no provision for posting of an employee on the basis of anticipation of retirement of other teachers. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Against the order dated 07.06.2025 (Annexure-P/3), the petitioner approached this Court by filing WPS No. 4484 of 2025, which has been disposed of by this Court along with another connected writ petition observing as under: “In view of submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the petitioners are directed to make fresh representation before the concerned District Rationalization Committee within a period of 05 days from today, and appear before the said Committee on 20th June, 2025. Thereafter, the Committee shall decide the representation of the petitioners within 07 days from the date of receipt of representation in accordance with law, in objective manner. Till decision on the representation is communicated to the petitioners, the impugned transfer order issued under Teacher Rationalization Instructions, so far as petitioners are concerned, 4 be kept in abeyance. 6. In compliance of the said order the petitioner approached the District Rationalization Committee who after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the circulars issued by the State Government on 28.04.2025 and 02.08.2024 declined to consider the grievance of the petitioner on the ground that there is no provision for posting husband & wife at the same place and even there is no provision for posting of the teacher on the basis of anticipation of retirement of other teachers. Even the Divisional Rationalization Committee also considered the case of the petitioner and proper opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner on 25.07.2025 and rejected the case of the petitioner. The order passed by the aforesaid authorities are just and proper warranting no interference by this Court. 7. Be that as it may, transfer is an incident of Service and that who should be transferred where, is for the appropriate authority to decide. It is also well settled that unless the order of transfer is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit is dismissed at motion stage itself. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Saurabh/Gowri