1 2026:CGHC:27015 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Order reserved on Final order delivered on Final order uploaded on : 23rd June, 2026 2nd July, 2026 2nd July, 2026 WPS No. 4137 of 2025 1 - Chhattisgarh Vidyalayin Shikshak Karmachari Sangh Through Its State President Shri Sanjay Kumar Tiwari S/o Late Shri Ramchand Tiwari Aged 54 Years H.Q. - 624 Prince Colony Laxmi Nagar Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Purshottam Lal Sapha S/o Shri Kartik Ram Sapha Aged About 54 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Dundera Block And Durg (C.G.) 3 - Jainendra Kumar Ganjir S/o Late Shri Romnath Ganjir Aged About 54 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Teligundra Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 4 - Sanjay Kumar Chandrakar S/o Kartik Ram Chandrakar Aged About 54 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Alldaras Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 5 - Jitendra Kumar Verma S/o Late Dayalu Ram Verma Aged About 55 Years Govt. Middle School Teligundra Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 6 - Smt. Malti Mandavi W/o Shri Ghanshyam Mandavi Aged About 47 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb). Govt. Middle School Mahkakala Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 7 - Huleshwar Prasad Tandan S/o Firanta Ram Tandan Aged JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.07.02 14:46:52 +0530 2 About 49 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Tekari Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 8 - Khilendra Kumar Sahu S/o Nand Kumar Sahu Aged About 44 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) . Govt. Middle School Teligundra Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 9 - Meena Sinwani W/o Shri Shyamratan Chaturvedi Aged About 42 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) . Govt. Middle School Parsada Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 10 - Thakur Ram Dewangan S/o Late Ramgulal Dewangan Aged About 54 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Borenda Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 11 - Rupesh Kumar Sahu S/o Rajpal Sahu Aged About 40 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Bhansuli (R) Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 12 - Rajesh Kumar Verma S/o Shri T.R. Verma Aged About 54 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Marra Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 13 - Kishor Kumar Dilliwar S/o Shri Lakhan Lal Dilliwar Aged About 47 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Jevra Sirsa Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 14 - Goverdhan Prasad Chandravanshi S/o Late Shri Vishambhar Aged About 54 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) . Govt. Middle School Ghasidas Nagar Ghughasi Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 15 - Tribhuwan Singh S/o Purshottam Singh Aged About 48 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) . Govt. Middle School Chandrakhuri Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 16 - Chitrarekha Thakur W/o Chandulal Thakur Aged About 44 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Chandrakhuri Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 17 - Krihna Kumar Deshmukh S/o Kholbhahara Ram Deshmukh Aged About 49 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Jevra Sirsa Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 18 - Chetan Singh Sahu S/o Guman Singh Sahu Aged About 52 Years Posted As U.D.T. Govt. Middle School Chandrakhuri Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 19 - Smt. Saroj Khutiyare W/o Omprakash Khutiyare Aged About 50 Years Posted As Asstt. Teacher (Lb) Govt. Primary School 3 Pisegaon Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 20 - Smt. Meena Bhadauriya W/o Ratnesh Singh Bhadauriya Aged About 40 Years Posted As Asstt. Teacher (Lb) Govt. Primary School Pisegaon Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 21 - Devkinandan Sharma S/o Shri Kailash Chandra Sharma Aged About 41 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Chandrakhuri Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 22 - Anupam Agrawal S/o Bramhanand Agrawal Aged About 46 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Chikhli Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 23 - Smt. Meena Sharma D/o Ramvinit Sharam Aged About 51 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Chikhli Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 24 - Brijkishore Sharma S/o Shri Kailash Chandra Sharma Aged About 48 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Rasmada Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 25 - Hojendra Kumar Verma S/o Shri Jogiram Verma Aged About 48 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Rasmada Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 26 - Smt. Madhuri Patel W/o Shri Mrinal Patel Aged About 43 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Pauvara Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 27 - Smt. Niharika Dubey W/o Shri Animesh Kumar Dubey Aged About 44 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Pauvara Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 28 - Rajeshwar Prasad Deshmukh S/o Shri Agnu Ram Deshmukh Aged About 44 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) C.A.C. Govt. Middle School Puraina Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 29 - Nehru Lal Sonwani S/o Shri Shatruhan Lal Sonwani Aged About 42 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Dundera Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 30 - Rakesh Kumar Tandan S/o Shri Sohan Tandan Aged About 43 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Joratarai Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 31 - Smt. Deepa Vishwakarma W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Aged About 43 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Joratarai Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 4 32 - Smt. Ishrat Bano W/o Rasuiddin Aged About 43 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Dundera Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 33 - Lekhram Chandrakar S/o Late Romlal Chandrakar Aged About 40 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Gadadih Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) 34 - Indresh Kumar Banjare S/o Shri O.R. Banjare Aged About 44 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Khopli Block And District - Durg (C.G.) 35 - Manish Kumar Sahu S/o Mannu Lal Sahu Aged About 39 Years Posted As Teacher (Lb) Govt. Middle School Khopli Block And District - Durg (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary State Of Chhattisgarh Department Of School Education Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Director Public Instructions Chhattisgarh H. Q. Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Collector District - Durg (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer District - Durg (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12633 of 2025 1 - Ramkhilawan Patel S/o Mr. Kawaladhar Patel Aged About 43 Years Post Assistant Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Primary School, Patelpara Bade Kurushnar, Block Kondagaon, Distt. Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 5 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Commissioner/president Divisional Rationalization Committee, Baster Division, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 712 of 2026 1 - Mrs. Kanchan Sahu W/o Late Mr. Someshwar Sahu Aged About 43 Years Post- Teacher (Local Body) Posted At Govt- Upper Primary School, Nara Block- Kanker Distt- Uttar Kanker Cg ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur C.G. 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur C.G. 3 - The Collector And President District- Rationalization Committee Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 4 - District Education Officer District- Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District- Level Rationalization Committee, Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 6 - Joint Director Education Division Baster Jadalpur Distt- Baster C.G. 7 - Divisional Level Committee Through- Secretary, Division 6 Baster Jagdalpur Distt- Baster C.G. 8 - Smt. Sindhi Shrivastava Teacher Local Body Govt. Upper Primary School Ghotiya, Block- Kanker Distt- Uttar Kanker C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 14154 of 2025 1 - Smt. Alka Singh W/o Raghuwar Singh Dhruw Aged About 34 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School Kalamdand, Block- Manendragarh Distt- Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, C.G. 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee Distt- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur C.G. 4 - District Education Officer Distt- Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee Distt- Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur C.G. 6 - Divisional Level Committee Through Secretary, Surguja Division, Ambikapur Distt. Surguja, C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 13631 of 2025 1 - Smt. Savita Gendley W/o Sameer Kumar Gupta, Aged About 35 Years Posted At Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Mauharpara, Ward No. 10, R/o Ward No. 3 Block- Manendragarh Distt. Manendragarh Chirmiri- Bharatpur C.G. ---Petitioner(s) 7 Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director, Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Manendragarh- Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer, Distt. Manendragarh- Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Manendragarh- Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) 6 - Divisional Level Committee Education, Sarguja, Division Ambikapur Distt. Sarguja (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12823 of 2025 1 - Lavan Singh Dhruwe S/o Mr. Ramadhin Dhruwe Aged About 51 Years Post Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School, Barvi, Block Bhanupratappur, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 8 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Commissioner/president Divisional Rationalization Committee, Baster Division, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12715 of 2025 1 - Abhilasha Shori D/o Mr. Karan Singh Shori Aged About 45 Years Post Assistant Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Primary School, Baghapara, Nathiyanawagan, Block Kanker Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 6 - Commissioner/ President Divisional Rationalization Committee, Baster Division, Jagdalpur C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12562 of 2025 1 - Rikeshwar Netam S/o Late Mr. Dayaram Netam Aged About 40 Years Post Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School, Dumarkot, Block Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. ---Petitioner(s) 9 Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 3 - The Collector And President, District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 4 - District Education Officer, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary, District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 6 - Commissioner/president, Divisional Rationalization Committee, Baster Division, Jagdalpur C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12498 of 2025 1 - Mrs. Jyoti Keshri W/o Mr. Omeshwar Prasad Keshri Aged About 36 Years Post Assistant Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Primary School, Nandanmara, Chhotepara,block Kanker, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 3 - The Collector And President, District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 4 - District Education Officer, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 6 - Commissioner/president, Divisional Rationalization 10 Committee,baster Division, Jagdalpur C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12485 of 2025 1 - Rakesh Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Mr. Punit Ram Nirmalkar Aged About 42 Years Post Teacher (Locak Body), Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School, Talabeda, Block Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, C.G. 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 6 - Commissioner / President Divisional Rationalization Committee, Baster Division, Jagdalpur, C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12447 of 2025 1 - Khilawan Ram Sahu S/o Mr. Ramratan Sahu Aged About 40 Years Post Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School, Kadhaikhodra, Block Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, C.G. 11 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 6 - Commissioner / President Divisional Rationalization Committee, Baster Division, Jagdalpur, C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12307 of 2025 1 - Mrs. Sunita Salam W/o Gajendar Kumar Salam Aged About 42 Years Assistant Teacher Local Body Posted At Govt, Balak Ashram, Puswada, Block- Kanker Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker Cg ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur Cg 2 - Director Public Instruction Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur, 3 - The Collector And President District- Rationalization Committee, District- Uttar Baster Kanker Cg 4 - District Education Officer Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker Cg 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District- Level Rationalization Committee, Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker Cg 6 - Joint Director Education Division Baster Jagdalpur Distt- Baster Cg 7 - Block Education Officer Block- Kanker, Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker Cg --- Respondent(s) 12 WPS No. 12280 of 2025 1 - Mrs. Sarita Kumar W/o Mr. Krishna Kumar Aged About 43 Years Post Assistant Teacher Local Body, Posted At Govt. Primary School, Ichhapur, Block Kanker Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur 3 - The Collector And President District Raitonalization Committee Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. 6 - Member Secretary Divisional Rationalization Hearing Committee Cum Joint Director, Education Division, Raipur, Integrate Education Complex, First Floor, Pension Bada, Distt. Raipur C.G. 7 - Block Education Officer Block Kanker Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12240 of 2025 1 - Smt. Bhagwati Bariha W/o Mr. Radheshyam Bariha Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Domarpali, Post Baloda Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G 13 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee Distt. Mahasamund C.G. 4 - District Education Officer Distt. Mahasamund C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee Distt. Mahasamund C.G. 6 - Member Secretary Divisional Rationalization Hearing Committee Cum Joint Director, Education Division, Raipur, Integrate Education Complex, First Floor, Pension Bada, Distt. Raipur C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12051 of 2025 1 - Durgu Ram Kunjam S/o Mr. Chamra Ram Kunjam Aged About 61 Years Post Assistant Teacher (Local Body), Posted At Govt. Primary School Koliyari, Block Kanker, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee District Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 4 - District Education Officer District Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee District Uttar Baster Kanker, C.G. 6 - Joint Director Education, Division Baster Jagdalpur, District Baster C.G. --- Respondent(s) 14 WPS No. 8268 of 2025 1 - Smt. Abha Jha W/o Amulya Chandra Jha Aged About 45 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Teacher At Government Primary School, Lalmatipara, Block - Manendragarh, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instruction, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector And President District Rationalization Committee, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer And Secretary District Level Rationalization Committee, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 7049 of 2025 1 - Smt. Rajani Thawait W/o Shri Parmeshwar Thawait Khadwang Aged About 43 Years Presently Posted As Government Primary School, Belkamar, Block - Khadgavan District - Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh 497449 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492002 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492002 3 - Collector Collector Complex, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- 15 Bharatpur Chhattisgarh 497442 4 - District Education Officer Deo Office, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh 497442 5 - Block Education Officer Block - Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh 497442 6 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Revenue) President Of Block-Level Committee Block - Manendragarh, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh 497442 --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 8245 of 2025 1 - Yogesh Kumar Sahu S/o Narendra Kumar Sahu, Aged About 35 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Government Primary School, Bancharouda, Block Arang, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions (Dpi) Through Its Director, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgah. 3 - Collector, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Join Director, School Education Division, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Mukesh Kumar Sahu, Posted As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Government Primary School, Bancharouda, Block Arang, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 7564 of 2025 1 - Rajiv Kumar Goutam Son Of Radheshyam Goutam Aged About 46 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Lb) And Posted At 16 Govt. Primary School Baheradih, Block Jaijaipur, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Tushen Kumar Maheshwari Son Of Samay Lal Maheshwari Aged About 49 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Lb) And Posted At Govt. Primary School Parsada, Block - Sakti, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ajay Kumar Banjare Son Of Kholbahra Banjare Aged About 37 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Lb) And Posted At Govt. Primary School Baheradih, Block -Sakti, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Hari Ram Chandra Son Of Jhuru Ram Chandra Aged About 37 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Lb) And Posted At Govt. Primary School Nehru Nagar Kutrabor, Block Jaijaipur, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Chandra Shekhar Chouhan S/o Satyanand Chouhan Aged About 44 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Lb) And Posted At Govt. Primary School Bhadora, Block - Malkharoda, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Sakti, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Education Officer Sakti, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 9250 of 2025 1 - Amit Kumar Dhankar S/o Chandrapal Aged About 41 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Primary School, Kumhari, Block Arang District Raipur 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. 17 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Joint Director, Education Division Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 4 - Collector, District Raipur C.G. 5 - District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 6 - Block Education Officer, Arang, District Raipur C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 8552 of 2025 1 - Abhijeet Rao S/o Late Chandrashekhar Rao Aged About 43 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Pali, Block Podi Uproda District Korba (C.G.) 2 - Kripalu Das Deewan S/o Pusau Das Deewan Aged About 44 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Chhindiya Block Podi Uproda District Korba (C.G.) 3 - Yugal Koshor Tiwari S/o Ravishankar Tiwari Aged About 45 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Hardewa , Block Podi Uproda District Korba (C.G.) 4 - Prem Chand Yadav S/o Murit Ram Yadav Aged About 44 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Amjhar Block Podi Uproda District Korba (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 Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Collector District Korba (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer Korba District Korba (C.G.) 18 6 - Block Edcation Officer Podi Uproda District Korba (C.G.) 7 - Block Edcation Officer Pali , District Korba (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 9305 of 2025 1 - Smt. Bhagwati Thakur W/o Bhupendra Thakur, Aged About 60 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School, Kumhari, Block Dharsiwa District Raipur (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 Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector, District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer, Dharsiwa, District Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 9935 of 2025 1 - Ravindra Bagde S/o Baburao Bagde Aged About 49 Years Presently Working As Teacher At Govt. Middle School Singhari, Block- Bilha, District - Bilaspur C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indravati 19 Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - The Joint Director, Education Division, District Bilaspur C.G. 4 - The Collector Cum President, District Level Rationalization Committee, District Bilaspur C.G. 5 - The District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 12475 of 2025 1 - Chhattisgarh Pradesh Shikshak Federation A Society Registered Under The Provisions Of C.G. Society Registration Act, 1973 Having Its Registered Office At Laxmi Niwas, Plot C-75, Street 15, Smriti Nagar, Bhilai District Durg C.G. Through Its Member Harish Dewangan, S/o Late Shri J.R. Dewangan, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Ward No. 29 Hospital Colony, Near Indira Market Station Road, Durg, District Durg C.G. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction, First Floor, Block - C, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur C.G. 3 - Joint Director, Education Division Raipur, Dist. Raipur C.G. 4 - Joint Director, Education Division Durg, Dist. Durg C.G. 5 - Joint Director, Education Division Bastar, Jagdalpur, Dist. Bastar C.G. 6 - Joint Director, Education Division- Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur C.G. 7 - Joint Director, Education Division- Surguja, Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G. --- Respondent(s) 20 WPS No. 9821 of 2025 1 - Rakesh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Ramdular Yadav Aged About 43 Years Presently Working As Teacher (Cac), Government Middle School Dhuma, Block- Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Joint Director Education Division, Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - The Collector Cum President District Level Rationalization Committee, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - The Block Education Officer Block- Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 5975 of 2025 1 - Peeyoosh Kumar Jaiswal S/o Late Shri Anil Kumar Jaiswal Aged About 51 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Teacher At Government Primary School, Bhandardai, Block - Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh 497335 2 - Shiv Kumar Prajapati S/o Shri Ramnarayan Prajapati Aged About 40 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Teacher At Government Primary School, Khalpara, Block - Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh 497335 3 - Mohan Lal Banjare S/o Shri Dakhal Sai Aged About 49 Years Presently Posted As Teacher At Government Upper Primary School, Govindpur, Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh 497335 4 - Vijay Singh S/o Shri Dritpal Singh Aged About 50 Years 21 Presently Posted As Teacher At Government Upper Primary School, Ratanpur, Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh 497335 5 - Dhan Sai S/o Shri Babulal Singh Aged About 43 Years Presently Posted As Government Upper Primary School, Shivpur, Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh 497335 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh D.E.O. Office, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Collector Complex, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur 4 - District Education Officer D.E.O. Office, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur 5 - Block Education Officer Block - Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur 6 - Sub Divisional Magistrate Revenue Division - Khadgawan, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur …. Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For respective Petitioners : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Shrawan Agrawal and Mr, Kaif Ali Rizvi, Mr. R.K. Kesharwani, Mr. Devashish Tiwari through V.C. along with Mr. Deepak Kaushik, Mr. Sibasish Mishra, Mr. Parag Kotecha, Mr. Rupendra Kumar Dewangan, Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu and Mr. R.K. Verma, Advocate For State : Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Addl. A.G. along with Mr. Shahil Singh, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge C A V Order 22 1. Since common facts and grounds are involved in these petitions, therefore, they are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the pleadings and documents of WPS No.12475 of 2025 are being referred. 2. (a) Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have called in question the rationalization instructions dated 02.08.2024 and the consequential communication dated 28.04.2025 on the ground that the same are contrary to the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short, "the Act of 2009") and the National Education Policy, 2020 (for short, "the NEP"). It is submitted that though the impugned instructions have ostensibly been issued to improve educational standards through rationalization of schools and teachers, however, their implementation has seriously prejudiced both teachers and students and adversely affected the functioning of schools. (b) Learned counsels further submit that the impugned policy is contrary to Section 25 of the Act of 2009, which mandates maintenance of the prescribed pupil-teacher ratio in each school. It is contended that the norms prescribed for Primary and Middle Schools are inconsistent with the statutory requirement of maintaining the teacher-student ratio school- 23 wise, resulting in depletion of teaching strength in several schools. According to learned counsel, the impugned executive instructions cannot override or dilute the statutory mandate contained in Section 25 of the Act of 2009. (c) It is next submitted that the impugned instructions have not been issued in the manner contemplated under Article 166 of the Constitution of India, as they have neither been expressed nor authenticated in accordance with law. It is contended that in the absence of compliance with the constitutional requirements, the impugned instructions cannot be treated as a valid and enforceable policy decision of the State Government. (d) Learned counsels further submit that the rationalization exercise is arbitrary inasmuch as it disturbs the existing cluster structure and treats Cluster Academic Coordinators/Head Masters at par with ordinary teaching staff. It is submitted that such officers discharge supervisory and administrative functions and, in many cases, Head Masters also act as Drawing & Disbursing Officers. Their inclusion in the pool for rationalization has artificially reduced the available teaching strength and disturbed a large number of posts of Head Masters, contrary to the provisions of the Chhattisgarh School Education Service (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, (for 24 short, "the Rules"). (e) It is further submitted that the entire exercise has been undertaken arbitrarily and in disregard of the prescribed norms relating to seniority, placement and counselling. According to learned counsel, the principle of "Last In First Out (LIFO)" has been mechanically applied, senior teachers have been bypassed, and the counselling process stood vitiated for want of proper disclosure of surplus lists and vacancies, thereby denying the affected teachers a meaningful opportunity of choice. It is contended that the impugned exercise has caused grave hardship to teachers, adversely affected students, and overlooked the educational needs of schools. On these grounds, it is prayed that the rationalization instructions dated 02.08.2024, the communications dated 25.04.2025 & 28.04.2025, and all consequential actions be quashed, with a further direction to the respondents to accommodate teachers in accordance with the NEP, 2020. (f) Learned counsels would submit that the impugned guidelines are not in conformity with Article 166 (1) of the Constitution of India as it has not been expressed by order in the name of the Hon’ble Governor of Chhattisgarh. In support of their contention, learned counsels would place reliance upon the decision of this Court rendered in the matter of 25 Smt. Shitala Diwan vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. (WPS No. 5780 of 2016 decided on 24.01.2017). 3. While adopting the aforesaid arguments, Mr. Parag Kotecha, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though he is questioning the implementation of the policy itself, as far as the transfer of the petitioners under the rationalization policy is concerned, the same is contrary to the guidelines prescribed and also contrary to the provisions of Article 166 of the Constitution of India and the provisions of the Act of 2009. 4. (I) Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the writ petitions and submits that the challenge to the rationalization instructions dated 02.08.2024 and the consequential communication dated 28.04.2025 is misconceived and founded on vague and omnibus pleadings. Referring to Annexure P-1 dated 28.04.2025, it is submitted that the impugned instructions are merely administrative guidelines issued to ensure rational and equitable deployment of teachers by identifying surplus teachers and redeploying them to schools facing shortage, including teacher-less and single-teacher schools, in the larger interest of students. It is submitted that the policy seeks to rectify the imbalance in teacher distribution across the State and, therefore, cannot be said to be arbitrary or illegal. 26 (II) Learned State counsel further submits that the plea regarding violation of Section 25 of the Act of 2009 is without any factual foundation, as the petitioners have not placed any school-wise data to establish breach of the prescribed pupil-teacher ratio. It is further submitted that the challenge founded on Article 166 of the Constitution is equally untenable, as the decision to undertake rationalization was approved by the Council of Ministers with the concurrence of Hon'ble the Governor on 09.07.2024 and the impugned instructions are traceable to a valid executive decision of the State Government. (III) Learned State counsel also disputes the contention regarding disturbance of the cluster structure and inclusion of Cluster Academic Coordinators/Head Masters in the rationalization process. It is submitted that the guidelines themselves provide adequate safeguards and priority to such categories and, therefore, the grievance proceeds on an incomplete reading of the policy. It is further submitted that the allegation regarding violation of the cadre structure or the Rules is equally devoid of substance, as the petitioners have neither identified any sanctioned post alleged to have been abolished nor demonstrated infringement of any enforceable service right. Learned State counsel submits that the allegations regarding arbitrary identification of surplus 27 teachers, violation of seniority, non-observance of norms and irregularities in counselling are general in nature and unsupported by any specific material. It is contended that the policy itself prescribes the procedure for identification of surplus teachers and the order of priority, and no individual instance of deviation has been substantiated. (IV) It is further submitted that the impugned instructions are administrative guidelines and not statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. Since the impugned exercise neither affects the petitioners' rank, status or emoluments nor infringes any vested right, no interference is warranted merely on allegations of hardship. On the aforesaid grounds, learned State counsel submits that no violation of any statutory provision, constitutional mandate or enforceable legal right has been established and, therefore, all the writ petitions deserve to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the pleadings and documents placed on record. 6. The challenge in the present batch of petitions is directed against the rationalization instructions dated 02.08.2024, the consequential communication dated 28.04.2025, and the action taken pursuant thereto. The principal grounds urged by the petitioners are that the impugned policy is contrary to 28 Section 25 of the Act, 2009, the NEP, 2020, the Rules and further that the same has not been issued in conformity with the Article 166 of the Constitution of India. 7. The first contention of the petitioners is that the impugned rationalization instructions are not a valid executive policy, having not been issued in accordance with Article 166 of the Constitution. The submission deserves rejection. 8. The respondents have placed on record the order of the School Education Department bearing No. F-2-24/2024/20-3 dated 16.07.2024, which has been passed by order and in the name of the Hon’ble Governor of Chhattisgarh, which categorically records that the Council of Ministers, in its meeting dated 09.07.2024, approved the proposal relating to rationalization of schools and teachers and authorized the Department to undertake all consequential action. The order specifically states: छत्तीसगढ़ शासन स्कू ल शिशाक्षा विभाग "मंत्रालय" मंहानदी भान, न रायपुरा अटल नगरा, // आदी शा// न रायपुरा अटल नगरा, दिदीनकू 16/07/2024 क्रमंकू एफ 2-24/2024/20-तीन:: मंवित्रा- पुरिराषदी( आदी शा दिदीनकू 29 09.07.2024 मं) विनर्ण+य शिलय गय हा, विकू " शाल ए शिशाक्षाकू- कू यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण कू सबंध मं) विभाग द्वारा प्रस्तीती प्रस्ती कू अनमं4दीन विकूय जाए तीथा इसस सबंधिधती समंस्ती अनषविगकू कूय+हा कू शिलए विभाग कू4 अधिधकू9 ती विकूय जाए।" छत्तीसगढ़ कू राज्यपुल कू नमं स तीथा आदी शानसरा, सहा/- (आरा.पु. मं+) अरा सशि< छत्तीसगढ़ शासन, स्कू ल शिशाक्षा विभाग 9. Article 166(1) of the Constitution requires that all executive action of the State Government shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the Governor. Article 166 is quoted below for ready reference : “166. Conduct of business of the Government of a State.- (1) All executive action of the Government of a State shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the Governor. (2) Orders and other instruments made and executed in the name of the Governor shall be authenticated in such manner as may be specified in rules to be made by the Governor, and the validity of an order or instrument which is so authenticated shall not be called in question on the ground that it is not an order or instrument made or executed by the Governor. (3) The Governor shall make rules for the more 30 convenient transaction of the business of the Government of the State, and for the allocation among Ministers of the said business in so far as it is not business with respect to which the Governor is by or under this Constitution required to act in his discretion. Once the policy itself emanates from a Cabinet decision and the consequential departmental order has been issued in the name of the Governor, the challenge founded upon Article 166 loses all force. The petitioners have not demonstrated any constitutional infirmity in the decision-making process. 10. The next submission is that the policy violates Section 25 of the Act, 2009, which mandates maintenance of the prescribed pupil-teacher ratio. 11. For the sake of convenience, it would be apt to quote Section 25 of the Act, 2009, which reads thus : 25. Pupil-Teacher Ratio.-(1) 1[Within three years] from the date of commencement of this Act, the appropriate Government and the local authority shall ensure that the Pupil-Teacher Ratio, as specified in the Schedule, is maintained in each school. (2) For the purpose of maintaining the Pupil-Teacher Ratio under sub-section (1), no teacher posted in a school shall be made to serve in any other school or office or deployed for any non-educational purpose, other than those specified in section 27. 12. From bare perusal of the above provision, it is crystal clear 31 that Section 25 undoubtedly casts an obligation upon the State Government to maintain the teacher-student ratio prescribed in the Schedule appended to the Act. However, the petitioners have not produced any school-wise data, statistical material or factual foundation to establish that the implementation of the rationalization policy has actually resulted in breach of the prescribed ratio. The pleadings contain only broad assertions unsupported by particulars. 13. It also deserves notice that the policy has been formulated after the State Government examined the existing teacher- student ratio, the availability of teachers across the State and the requirement of teachers in institutions suffering from shortage. The material placed before the Court indicates that the policy was framed after collection of relevant data with the object of ensuring equitable distribution of teachers and improving the quality of education. There is nothing on record to suggest that the policy has been formulated without application of mind or for any extraneous purpose. 14. In the instructions/guidelines dated 2.8.2024 there is a specific instruction as to how determine the surplus teachers, procedure for determination of surplus teachers and the concelling process. Clauses 6, 7 and 10 of the instructions/ guidelines dated 2.8.2024 read thus : छः- अतिशेष शिशेक्षकों कों चिन्हां कोंन 32 1. विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती एकू हा पुरिरासरा मं) क्ति@ती दी4 य दी4 स अधिधकू प्रथाधिमंकू/ पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू विद्यालय- कूC दीजा+ सख्य ए कूय+राती शिशाक्षाकू- कूC विद्यालय मं) पुदी@पुन वितीशिथा कू आधरा पुरा अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC जानकूरा स<बंद्ध कूरा ग, सथा हा सधिमंविती विनकूट कू कूमं दीजा+ सख्य ल विद्यालय- कू अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC स< भा ती,यरा कूरा ग। ( सलग्न :- पुरिराशिशाष्ठ 5) 2. विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती द्वारा दीजा+ सख्य कू अनपुती मं) रिरा/ती पुदी- कूC विद्यालयरा स< ती,यरा कूC जाय ग। 3. विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती द्वारा विषयरा रिरा/ती पुदी- कूC विद्यालयरा स< ती,यरा कूC जाय ग। 4. अवितीमं रूपु स ती,यरा स< कू आधरा पुरा जिजाल स्तीराय सधिमंविती अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कू रिरा/ती पुदी- पुरा पुदीकून कूउंसलिंलLग कू मंध्यमं स कूरा ग। 5. ई सग+ कू अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC पुदी@पुन ई सग+ कूC शालओं मं) तीथा ट सग+ कू अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC पुदी@पुन ट सग+ कूC शालओं मं) कूC जाय ग। 6. जिजाल स्तीरा पुरा पुदी@पुन कू पुश्चाती( रिरा/ती @न न हा4न कू कूरार्ण कू छ अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC पुदी@पुन शा ष राहा जाती हा, ती4 इनकूC स< जिजाल सधिमंविती द्वारा सभागय सय/ती स<लकू कू4 प्र विषती विकूय जाय ग। सभागय सय/ती स<लकू द्वारा इसकू पुराक्षार्ण कूरा कूउंसलिंलLग कू मंध्यमं स पुदी@पुन कूC कूय+हा कूC जाय ग। सहायकू शिशाक्षाकू कू पुदी जिजाल कू, डरा कू हा,। अतीP इनकूC पुदी@पुन जिजाल स बंहारा नहाQ हा4ग। इस तीराहा शिशाक्षाकू कू पुदी सभाग कू, डरा कू हा,। अतीP इनकूC पुदी@पुन सभाग कू बंहारा नहाQ हा4ग। अवितीशा ष व्याख्यती जिजानकू समंय4जान जिजाल ए सभाग स्तीरा पुरा नहाQ हा4 पु राहा हा, उंसकूC स< सभागय सय/ती स<लकू द्वारा स<लकू. ल4कू शिशाक्षार्ण कू4 प्र विषती कूC जाय ग। स<लकू, ल4कू शिशाक्षार्ण द्वारा शा ष अवितीशा ष व्याख्यतीओं कू पुदीकून कूउंसलिंलLग कू मंध्यमं स विकूय जाय ग। 33 सा  :- अतिशेष शिशेक्षकों कों चिन्हां कोंन हां प्रतियाः - विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण ल विद्यालय- कू अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- तीथा अन्य विद्यालय- कू अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कू शि<न्हाकून हा ती विनम्ननसरा प्रविक्रय अपुनय गP- A. प्र थमिकों शे ला - 01. एकू हा पुरिरासरा मं) यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण ल प्रथाधिमंकू विद्यालय- कू छत्रा- कूC सख्य कू अनपुती मं) शिशाक्षाकू- कूC गर्णन कूC जाय ग। <विकू प्रधन पुठकू शिशाक्षाकूCय पुदी हा, अतीP इसकूC गर्णन शिशाक्षाकूCय पुदी कू रूपु मं) कूC जाय ग। दी4न- विद्यालय- कू शिशाक्षाकू- कूC सख्य कू4 जा4ड़कूरा शिशाक्षाकू कूC गर्णन छत्रा अनपुती मं) कूC जाय ग। 02. यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण ल प्रथाधिमंकू विद्यालय- कूC कू ल दीजा+ सख्य यदिदी 60 य उंसस कूमं हा, हा एकू प्रधन पुठकू ए एकू सहायकू शिशाक्षाकू राहा)ग । शा ष अवितीशा ष कूC श्रे र्ण मं) आय)ग । यदिदी दी4न- प्रथाधिमंकू शालओं मं) प्रधन पुठकू पुदी@ हा, ती4 जा4 प्रधन पुठकू कूविनष्ठ हा4ग उंस अवितीशा ष मंन जाय ग तीथा जाहाX कू4ई भा प्रधनपुठकू पुदी@ नहाQ हा, हाX दी4 शिशाक्षाकू पुदी@ राहा ग)। 03. जिजान विद्यालय- कूC दीजा+ सख्य 61 स 90 हा4ग हा प्रधन पुठकू सविहाती तीन शिशाक्षाकू, 91 स 120 मं) प्रधन पुठकू सविहाती <रा शिशाक्षाकू, 121 स 150 तीकू कूC दीजा+ सख्य मं) प्रधन पुठकू सविहाती 5 शिशाक्षाकू राहा)ग । इस प्रकूरा आगमं 9जिद्ध पुरा शिशाक्षाकू पुदी@ विकूय जाय कूC कूय+हा कूC जाय ग। 04. शाल मं) पुदी@/ कूय+भारा ग्रहार्ण दिदीनकू कू आधरा पुरा कूविनष्ठतीमं सहायकू शिशाक्षाकू अवितीशा ष मंन जाय)ग । 05. समंपु कूC प्रथाधिमंकू शालओं कू यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण कू फलस्रूपु अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC गर्णन बिंबंLदु क्र. 01 स 04 अनसरा कूC जाय ग। 06. विबंन्दु क्र. 01 स 05 स पु9थाकू अन्य प्रथाधिमंकू विद्यालय जिजानकू यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण नहाQ विकूय गय हा,, पुराती हा दीजा+ सख्य कू अनपुती मं) सहायकू शिशाक्षाकू अवितीशा ष हा,, विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती उंनकूC भा पु9थाकू स स< ती,यरा कूरा ग। 34 B. पूर्व  ध्याःमिकों शे ला :- 01. एकू हा पुरिरासरा कू यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण ल पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू शालओं मं) छत्रा सख्य कू अनपुती मं) शिशाक्षाकू- कूC गर्णन कूC जाय ग। प्रधन पुठकू कू4 भा शिशाक्षाकूCय पुदी कू रूपु मं) जा4ड़कूरा शिशाक्षाकू- कूC गर्णन कूC जाय ग। 02. यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण ल पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू शालओं मं) जिजानकूC दीजा+ सख्य 105 य उंसस कूमं हा, हा प्रधन पुठकू ए तीन शिशाक्षाकू पुदी@ राहा)ग । इसकू अवितीरिरा/ती पुदी@ शिशाक्षाकू अवितीशा ष मंन जाय)ग । पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू शाल मं) अवितीशा ष कूC गर्णन कूराती समंय प्रधन पुठकू सविहाती दी4न- विद्यालय- मं) पुदी@ शिशाक्षाकू- कू विषय कू4 ध्यन मं) राख जाय ग। यदिदी दी4न- विद्यालय- मं) प्रधन पुठकू पुदी@ हा\ ती4, जा4 प्रधन पुठकू कूविनष्ठ हा, उंस अवितीशा ष मंन जाय ग। 03. जिजान विद्यालय- कूC दीजा+ सख्य 106 स 140 हा, हा प्रधन पुठकू सविहाती पु< शिशाक्षाकू पुदी@ हा-ग । इस तीराहा प्रत्य कू 35 छत्रा सख्य मं) एकू अवितीरिरा/ती शिशाक्षाकू दी य हा4ग। अवितीशा ष कूC गर्णन कूराती समंय विषय कू4 ध्यन मं) राख जाय ग। 04. शाल मं) पुदी@ / कूय+भारा ग्रहार्ण दिदीनकू कू आधरा पुरा एकू हा विषय कू दी4 शिशाक्षाकू मं) स कूविनष्ठतीमं कू4 अवितीशा ष मंन जाय ग। 05. विषय कूC गर्णन कूराती समंय विषय शिशाक्षाकू- ( प्रधन पुठकू सविहाती) कू <क्रनक्रमं विनम्ननसरा हा4गP- (i) अग्र जा (ii) गणिर्णती (iii) कूल (iv) विज्ञान (v) विहान्दी (vi) सस्कू9 ती/उंर्दू+/णिर्णज्य 06. समंपु@ दी4 पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू शालओं कू यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण मं) शिशाक्षाकू- कू अवितीशा ष कूC गर्णन विबंन्दु क्र. 1 स 5 अनसरा कूC जाय ग। 07. विबंन्दु क्र. 01 स 06 कू विद्यालय- स पु9थाकू अन्य पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू शालए जिजानकू यक्ति/तीय/तीकूरार्ण नहाQ विकूय गय हा,, पुराती दीजा+ सख्य कू अनपुती मं) हा अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू कूय+राती हा\, विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती ऐस विद्यालय- कू अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC स< पु9थाकू स ती,यरा कूरा ग। 35 C. हां ई/ हां याःर साकों ण्डर& स्कों ला :- 1. हाई/ हायरा स कू ण्डरा स्कू ल मं) जाहा दीजा+ सख्य बंहुती कूमं हा,, औरा हाX एकू हा विषय कू दी4 व्याख्यती कूय+राती हा, ( प्रविती व्याख्यती अध्यपुन 04 कूलखण्ड स कूमं), ती4 उंनमं) स कूविनष्ठतीमं अवितीशा ष हा4ग। 2. हायरा स कू ण्डरा स्कू ल मं) स्कू9 ती विकूस सकूय मं) एकू भा छत्रा/ छत्रा अध्ययनराती( नहाQ हा,, ती4 ऐस क्ति@विती मं) सबंधिधती सकूय कू व्याख्यतीओं कू4 जिजान स्कू ल- मं) उंस सकूय कू छत्रा अध्ययनराती( हा,, हा समंय4जिजाती विकूय जाय ग। 3. हाई/ हायरा स कू ण्डरा स्कू ल- मं) स्कू9 ती पुदी कू विरूद्ध एकू स अधिधकू व्याख्यती कूय+राती हा4न पुरा दी4न- मं) स जा4 कूविनष्ठ हा4ग उंस अवितीशा ष मंन जाय ग 4. विकूसखण्ड स्तीराय सधिमंविती उंपुरा4/ती विनदीdशा अनसरा अवितीशा ष व्याख्यतीओं कूC स< ए विद्यालयरा पुदी रिरा/तीती कूC स< ती,यरा कूरा ग। xxx xxx xxx दसा :- कों उंसालिंला+ग कों- प्रतियाः :- अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC पुदी@पुन पुरादीशाe कूfउंसलिंलLग कू मंध्यमं स इसकूC प्रविक्रय विनम्ननसरा हा4ग :- 1. अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC पुदी@पुन स+प्रथामं शिशाक्षाकू विविहान विद्यालय- मं) कूC जाय ग इसकू पुश्चाती( एकूल शिशाक्षाकूCय विद्यालय- मं) पुदी@पुन कूC जाय ग। 2. शिशाक्षाकू विविहान विद्यालय- ए एकूल शिशाक्षाकूCय विद्यालय- मं) पुदी@पुन कू पुश्चाती( जिजान शालओं मं) दीजा+ सख्य अधिधकू हा,, ती4 उंनमं) आश्यकूतीनसरा पुदी@पुन कूC जाय ग। 3. पु+ मंध्यधिमंकू विद्यालय- तीथा हाई स्कू ल/ हायरा स कू ण्डरा मं) पुदी@पुन हा ती विषय कू ध्यन राख जाय ग। 4. कूउंसलिंलLग हा ती जिजातीन शिशाक्षाकू अवितीशा ष हा, उंतीन हा सख्य मं) शिशाक्षाकू विहान, एकूल शिशाक्षाकूCय ए अधिधकू दीजा+ सख्य ल 36 विद्यालय- कू4 दीर्शिशाLती विकूय जाय । विकून्ती यहा यहा ध्यन मं) राख जाय ग विकू, सभा शिशाक्षाकू विहान विद्यालय- ए इसकू पुश्चाती( सभा एकूल शिशाक्षाकूCय विद्यालय- कू4 अविनय+ रूपु स दीर्शिशाLती विकूय जाय । तीदी(नपुराती आश्यकूतीनसरा अधिधकू दीजा+ सख्य ल विद्यालय- कू4 दीर्शिशाLती विकूय जाय । 5. अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कूC गर्णन कूराती समंय दिदीव्याग कू4ट कू अन्तीग+ती विनय/ती शिशाक्षाकू यदिदी कूविनष्ठतीमं हा, ती4 उं/ती दिदीव्याग शिशाक्षाकू कू4 छ4ड़कूरा अन्य कूविनष्ठ शिशाक्षाकू कूC गर्णन अवितीशा ष कू रूपु मं) कूC जाय ग। 6. जा4 शिशाक्षाकू पुराविक्षा अधिध मं) हा\, उंनकूC गर्णन अवितीशा ष कू रूपु मं) नहाQ कूC जाय ग /य4विकू, पुराविक्षा अधिध समंप्तिjती कू पुश्चाती( हा उंनकूC स@ मं) पुरिराती+न सभा हा,। 7. कूउंसलिंलLग मं) रिरा/ती @न- कू <यन कूरान कू शिलय अवितीशा ष शिशाक्षाकू- कू4 रायती क्रमं मं) न< दिदीय क्रमं अनसरा कूउंसलिंलLग हा ती आमंवित्राती विकूय जाय P- 1. ऐस शिशाक्षाकू जिजानकूC स विन9णित्ती 02 ष+ य उंसस कूमं हा4। 2. मंविहाल शिशाणिक्षाकू। ( रिराष्ठती स< कू आधरा पुरा) 3. शासन स मंन्यती प्रjती शिशाक्षाकू सगठन कू पुत्रा पुदीधिधकूरा। 4. सकू ल शा,णिक्षाकू समंन्यकू। ( रिराष्ठती स< कू आधरा पुरा) 5. अन्य शिशाक्षाकू। ( रिराष्ठती स< कू आधरा पुरा) 15. Bare perusal of the aforesaid guidelines, it is crystal clear that while rationalizing teachers in schools situated in the same campus, the teacher strength shall be determined with reference to the aggregate number of students and even the Head Master shall be counted as a teaching post. The object of the policy is thus to ensure equitable deployment of teachers so that schools suffering from acute shortage receive adequate teaching staff. This Court, therefore, finds 37 no material to conclude that the policy violates Section 25 of the Act, 2009. 16. Once the State Government, after considering the prevailing factual position, has evolved a mechanism for identification of surplus teachers and their deployment, the Court cannot substitute its own methodology unless the criteria itself is shown to be arbitrary, capricious or contrary to law. Merely because certain teachers are identified as surplus does not render the policy unconstitutional. 17. The contention founded upon the NEP, 2020 also deserves rejection. The said policy emphasizes universal access to quality education, equitable distribution of educational resources and optimum utilization of teachers. Rational deployment of available teaching personnel to remove teacherless and single-teacher schools is consistent with these objectives. No provision of the NEP having statutory force has been shown which prohibits such administrative redistribution. 18. The challenge founded upon the Recruitment Rules is also liable to fail for want of proper pleadings. Except making general assertions, the petitioners have neither identified any specific provision of the Rules alleged to have been violated nor demonstrated in what manner the impugned policy infringes any statutory protection. In the absence of such 38 factual and legal foundation, the challenge cannot be sustained. 19. The petitioners have further argued that the inclusion of Head Masters and Cluster Academic Coordinators in the rationalization exercise disturbs the cadre structure and violates the Recruitment Rules. 20. The submission is bereft of particulars. No provision of the Rules has been demonstrated to have been violated. The petitioners have neither established abolition of any cadre nor alteration of service conditions nor reduction of any promotional avenue. The respondents have specifically stated that the policy itself provides due priority and protection to different categories while undertaking rationalization. In absence of any factual foundation, the challenge cannot be sustained. 21. The allegation that the respondents have arbitrarily identified surplus teachers by ignoring seniority, counselling norms and the principle of Last-In-First-Out (LIFO) is equally unsupported by any concrete material. 22. This Court also finds substance in the objection raised by the respondents that the petitioners have failed to establish infringement of any vested legal right. Rational deployment of teachers is an incidence of service. Unless such deployment is shown to violate statutory provisions or constitutional 39 guarantees, judicial review remains limited. 23. Even assuming that implementation of the impugned policy results in transfer or change of place of posting of certain teachers, such consequence by itself cannot invalidate the policy. Transfer and posting are matters falling within the exclusive administrative domain of the employer and a Government servant has no statutory or constitutional right to remain posted at a particular place. Once the administration has found concentration of teachers in certain schools and shortage in others, the manner of rational deployment is primarily for the executive to determine. 24. The Supreme Court in State of M.P. and Others v. Dr. Yashwant Trimbak, (1996) 2 SCC 305, has held that matters relating to transfer and deployment of Government servants primarily fall within the domain of the executive and the Courts ought not to interfere unless the action is vitiated by mala fides or violation of any statutory rule. Administrative exigencies are matters for the employer to determine and not for the Court to substitute its own opinion. The petitioners have neither pleaded mala fides against any authority nor demonstrated violation of any mandatory statutory provision. 25. Equally, the challenge to the policy itself cannot be entertained merely because another view may also be possible. The scope of judicial review over policy decisions is 40 extremely limited. 26. It is equally well settled that the Court cannot sit in judgment over the wisdom or efficacy of an executive policy merely because another view may also be possible. Unless the policy is shown to be inconsistent with the parent statute or violative of constitutional limitations, its desirability or effectiveness lies outside the scope of judicial review. 27. The Supreme Court in Directorate of Film Festivals and Others v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain and Others, (2007) 4 SCC 737, has reiterated that policy decisions of the Government are not ordinarily amenable to judicial review unless they are patently arbitrary, discriminatory, mala fide or violative of constitutional or statutory provisions. Courts do not sit in appeal over the wisdom of executive policy nor can they substitute their own opinion for that of the Government in matters involving administrative choices. 28. The rationalization policy under challenge has been framed after Cabinet approval with the objective of ensuring equitable distribution of teachers throughout the State. Whether another model of rationalization would have been more appropriate is a matter of administrative wisdom and not of judicial review. 29. This Court also finds that the issue involved is no longer res integra. The Divison Bench of this Court in Vikram Singh 41 Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2022 SCC OnLine Chh 1137, while considering interference in matters involving educational administration and deployment of teachers, has held that formulation and implementation of such administrative policies lie primarily within the executive domain and the scope of judicial interference under Article 226 is confined only to cases where the policy is demonstrated to be arbitrary, mala fide or contrary to statutory provisions. The Court further observed that administrative decisions taken in public interest for ensuring better educational administration deserve judicial deference unless shown to suffer from manifest illegality. The principles laid down in the aforesaid judgment squarely apply to the facts of the present case. 30. The material placed before this Court further indicates that the impugned rationalization exercise has been undertaken to address the long-standing issue of teacher-less and single-teacher schools in the State. Such an exercise is directly relatable to the constitutional obligation of the State flowing from Articles 21-A, 41, 45 and 46 of the Constitution of India, read with the provisions of the Act, 2009. Ensuring equitable availability of teachers across Government schools is unquestionably a matter of larger public interest. 31. In matters concerning educational administration, the Court 42 ought to exercise restraint where the Government is acting bona fide with the object of ensuring adequate availability of teachers in schools suffering from shortage. Questions relating to the optimal deployment of teaching personnel are essentially matters of educational policy and administrative expertise. 32. The petitioners have failed to establish violation of Section 25 of the Act, 2009, Article 166 of the Constitution of India, the Rules, or any other statutory or constitutional provision. They have also failed to establish arbitrariness, mala fides or infringement of any enforceable legal right. 33. The reliance placed by the learned counsels for the petitioners upon the decision rendered by this Court in the matter of Smt. Shitala Diwan (supra) would not be applicable to the facts of the present cases because the order dated 16.07.2024, which has been quoted in the preceding para of this order, has duly been passed by order and in the name of the Hon’ble the Governor of Chhattisgarh, which categorically records that the Council of Ministers, in its meeting dated 09.07.2024, approved the proposal relating to rationalization of schools and teachers and authorized the department to undertake all consequential actions. Thus, it appears that the consequent impugned guidelines/ executive action of the State Government shall be treated to be taken 43 by order and in the name of the Hon’ble Governor of Chhattisgarh. 34. On a careful reading of the impugned policy and its broad features, it is evident that the same has been framed with the avowed object of improving the quality of education, maintaining a proper teacher–pupil ratio, and ensuring an equitable distribution of teachers across schools, particularly by addressing the shortage of teachers in teacher-less and single-teacher schools. The decision appears to have been taken at the highest level of the Government after due consideration of relevant data concerning the number of teachers in the Department, the prevailing teacher–pupil ratio, and the requirement of teachers in rural and other under-served areas. Nothing in the policy suggests that it has been framed without due application of mind or with any oblique motive. On the contrary, it reflects a conscious administrative effort to facilitate effective teaching in Government and Panchayat schools so that students, particularly those studying in Government institutions, receive quality education in furtherance of the legislative intent underlying the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The mere fact that, in a given case, the number of teachers posted in a school is either less than or exceeds the sanctioned set-up does not 44 render the policy vulnerable to challenge, as the sanctioned strength is prescribed primarily for budgetary and administrative purposes to determine the overall cadre strength within the Department and does not confer any vested or enforceable right upon an individual teacher or an association to question the validity of the policy. Likewise, even if the implementation of the policy incidentally results in the transfer or posting of teachers, such a consequence cannot be a ground to invalidate it, since matters relating to transfer and posting of teachers fall squarely within the exclusive administrative domain of the Government. The impugned policy merely lays down broad administrative guidelines without any statutory force and cannot be construed as an executive instruction issued under Article 166 of the Constitution so as to invite judicial review of its contents, save on the limited and well-settled grounds on which administrative policies are amenable to judicial scrutiny. In matters of administration, the Court ought to exercise restraint and be slow in interfering where the Government has acted bona fide in pursuit of the larger public interest of ensuring adequate availability and rational distribution of teachers in rural areas and in schools suffering from an acute shortage of teaching staff. 45 35. In view of the settled principles governing judicial review of executive policy decisions as laid down in Dr. Yashwant Trimbak (supra), Gaurav Ashwin Jain (supra), and the judgment of this Court in Vikram Singh Yadav (supra), this Court finds no ground warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 36. Consequently, the challenge, to the rationalization instructions and all consequential actions taken thereunder, is devoid of merit and deserves to be rejected. 37. Accordingly, all the writ petitions stand dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Jyoti/ Gowri