1 CGHC010385572026 2026:CGHC:42680 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7198 of 2026 Shivhare Prasad Gupta S/o Baldev Prasad Gupta Aged About 49 Years Presently Working As Head Master (Primary School) At Govt. Primary School, Loharpara, Cluster Salwahi, Block Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner 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, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Managing Director, Samagra Shiksha, State Project Office, Composite Building, Second Floor, Chhattisgarh Board Of Secondary Education, Pension Bada, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector-Cum-District Mission Director Samagra Shiksha, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - District Project Director, Samagra Shiksha, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.10.01 18:06:32 +0530 2 6 - District Education Officer, Samagra Shiksha, District Project Office, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 7 - Block Education Officer, Ramchandrapur District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 8 - Sukhdev Prasad Yadav Presently Posted As Cluster Coordinator. Substantive Post Is Head Master (Primary School), At Govt. Primary School, Jarkatpara, Cluster Talkeshwarpur, Block Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer For Respondents No.3 & 5 : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate alongwith Mr. Arpit Parakh, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 01/10/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashment of the order dated 20.08.2026 (Annexure P/1), whereby the charge of Cluster Coordinator has been withdrawn from the petitioner and the same has been handed over to private respondent No.8. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is presently working as Head Master at Government Primary School, Loharpara, Cluster Salwahi, Block Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, was holding the additional charge of Cluster Coordinator, Cluster Centre Salwahi, 3 which has been withdrawn vide impugned order dated 20.08.2026 (Annexure P/1) and handed over to respondent No.8. He submits that the said charge has been withdrawn without following the procedure prescribed under the guidelines dated 22.01.2021 (Annexure P/4) issued by respondent No.3/ Managing Director, Samagra Siksha, Stage Project Office, particularly the requirement of approval of the Collector, and without affording any opportunity to the petitioner. He further submits that respondent No.8 belongs to Cluster Talkeshwarpur and not to any school within Cluster Centre Salwahi and, therefore, the handing over of the charge to respondent No.8 is also contrary to the aforesaid guidelines. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order deserves to be quashed and the petitioner may be permitted to continue as Cluster Coordinator, Cluster Centre Salwahi. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposing the submissions made by the petitioner, submits that the charge of Cluster Coordinator has been withdrawn from the petitioner in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the guidelines dated 22.01.2021. He submits that the selection process prescribed under the said guidelines cannot be equated with the procedure for withdrawal of the charge already assigned to the petitioner. He, therefore, submits that there is no illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 4 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. From perusal of the impugned order dated 20.08.2026 (Annexure P/1), it appears that the charge of Cluster Coordinator was withdrawn from the petitioner and the same was handed over to respondent No.8. The principal contention of the petitioner is that the procedure prescribed under the guidelines dated 22.01.2021 (Annexure P/4) has not been followed while withdrawing the charge from him. 6. Bare perusal of the guidelines dated 22.01.2021 (Annexure P/4), relied upon by the petitioner, shows that it prescribes the process for selection of a Cluster Coordinator. The said selection process cannot be equated with the procedure for withdrawal of the charge of Cluster Coordinator already assigned to the petitioner. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate any specific illegality or arbitrariness in the decision to withdraw the charge from him or to raise any other valid ground warranting interference with the impugned order. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE $. Bhilwar