1 2026:CGHC:26137 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 11 of 2022 1 - Tikam Das Vaishnav S/o Shri Bhuwaneshwar Das Vaishnav, Aged About 43 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) An Postedat Govt. High School Bijna, Block Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhatisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur(C.G.) 2 - Director, Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction First Floor, C- Block, Indravati Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction Bilaspur,district Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Yogesh Sahu Working At Govt. High School Fulwari F Block Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 5 - Lalaram Working At Govt. High School Chakraway, Block Nawagarh Disrict Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate alongwith Shri G.P. Mathur, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Anil S. Pandey, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board NIRMALA RAO 2 25.6.2026 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to consider his grievance and direct the respondents to give posting as per circular dated 05.08.2021 in E-cadre School as per his merit and preference and physical disability, in the interest of justice. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to give posting in E-cadre School at Govt. Higher Secondary School Kondatarai District Raigarh or any suitable vacant post looking to physical disability, in the interest of justice. (iii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Lecturer (Maths) E-Cadre vide order dated 31.8.2021 at Government High School Bijna, Block Tamnar, District Raigarh. He would further submit that respondent No.3 should have considered name of the petitioner for transfer/ posting at a suitable place and nearby place. As the petitioner is physically challenged person and the certificate in this regard has been placed on record as Annexure-P/2. He would pray to allow this petition. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would 3 submit that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Lecturer (Maths) E-Cadre vide order dated 31.8.2021 and the said offer was accepted without any objection. He would further submit that the petitioner cannot raise any grievance regarding the place of posting after five years. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5) With regard to relief clause (i), the petitioner was appointed on the post of Lecturer (Maths) E-Cadre on 31.8.2021 and after five years, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the order of posting. However, with regard to posting of the petitioner to a nearby place, considering that the petitioner is physically challenged, the State authorities should consider the claim of the petitioner sympathetically. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Net Ram Yadav vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1022 observed in para 31 is as under: “31. One of the hindrances/disadvantages faced by the physically disabled persons is the inability to move freely and easily. In consideration of the obstacles encountered by persons with disabilities, the State has issued the said notification/circular dated 20th July 2000 for posting disabled persons to places of their choice, to the extent feasible. The object of this benefit to the physically disabled is to, inter alia, enable the physically disabled to be posted at a place where assistance may readily be available. The distance from the residence may be a relevant consideration to avoid 4 commuting long distances. The benefit which has been given to the disabled through the Circular/Government Order cannot be taken away by subjecting the exercise of the right to avail of the benefit on such terms and conditions, as would render the benefit otiose.” 6) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this petition at this juncture, is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a representation for posting/ transfer of his services to a place of his choice or nearby place. Such representation shall be considered by respondents No.2 & 3 strictly in accordance with law. The petitioner is permitted to make a representation before the concerned authority within a period of 30 days from today, and in turn, the said authority is directed to take prompt decision in an objective manner within a further period of 90 days. 7) Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi