1 / 5 2026:CGHC:11616 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2337 of 2026 1 - Ku. Shakuntala Rathore D/o Late Harishankar Rathore Aged About 58 Years Presently Working As Lecturer Commerce Government Higher Secondary School Dashrangpur, Block And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt Krishna Devi Sahu W/o Shri Hemant Kumar Sahu Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Lecturer, Commerce Government Higher Secondary Kona, Block And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Joint Director Education Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Collector District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 6 - Collector District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 7 - District Education Officer District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.03.19 11:06:43 +0530 2 / 5 8 - District Education Officer District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, Advocate For State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 11.03.2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court pleased to hold that Action on the part of the Respondent Authorities is in Patent Violation of Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India and same is illegal, arbitrary, capricious and bad in law & is liable to be set aside. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 25.09.2025 (Annexure P/7), Order dated 25.09.2025 (Annexuer P/8), order dated 17.12.2025 (Annexuer P/26) and order dated 17.12.2025 (Annexuer P/27). 10.3 Respondents may kindly be directed to proceed denovo in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Directives dated 02.08.2024 of the Rationalization Scheme & Owing to the Procedure Adopted by the District Education Officer, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Respondent no. 7) in not showing actual vacant position & the same is not in accordance with the policy formulated by the State Govt. for posting of teacher in Excess by Mode of Counseling. 10.4 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire record of the case. 3 / 5 10.5 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners were holding the post of lecturer (Commerce) at Govt. Higher Secondary School Sivani block Nawagarh District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.) were transferred to Govt. Higher Secondary School Dasgrangpur, Block and District Mungeli and Govt. Higher Secondary School Kona block and District Mungeli (C.G.) respectively. The transfer of petitioner is on the ground that in Government Higher Secondary School no students have been admitted for commerce stream, however, at the time of counseling proceedings all the schools available for posting of teachers like petitioners are not been shown, therefore, it caused prejudice to petitioners in opting school at district level. He also submits that according to his instructions petitioners have informed that the number of schools within the District – Janjgir Champa two commerce lecturer have been posted against one post and, therefore, posting of lecturers is not according to rationalization policy formulated by State Government. This aspect has not been considered and decided by State Level Committee. 3. Learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for petitioners and would submit that according to Clause 7(c) (2) of the policy formulated by State Government it is clearly mentioned that in higher secondary school where ever students are not admitted of concerned stream then they will be accommodated/transferred in the schools where such students are admitted and prosecuting their 4 / 5 studies. Admittedly in the Govt. Higher Secondary School, Sivni students of commerce stream is nill, therefore, petitioners have been transferred were the students of commerce stream are prosecuting their studies. It is submitted by learned State counsel that according to policy formulated by State Government at the time of counseling, senior teachers is to be given priority in counseling and posting to nearby places and thereafter, to the other teachers. According to the documents, two teachers were posted within the district and thereafter, other teachers were sent for counseling at Divisional Level. Petitioners have been posted after counseling at Divisional Level. Hence, there is no error in the procedure adopted by the respondents for posting of petitioners who are surplus teachers, in the facts of the case. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 5. Petitioners have submitted representation, copy of which is placed in record at page no. 16 which is also read by counsel of petitioners in support of his contention. Though in the representation there is mention that in some schools two lecturers of commerce against one sanction post is posted however, schools have not been specifically named therein. It appears that ground raised in the representation is vague, without any specification and particulars so as to identify the said schools. 6. It is also not disputed by the learned counsel for petitioner that in the schools in which petitioners were earlier posted, number of students admitted and prosecuting their studies in commerce stream is nill. According to policy formulated by the State Govt. under clause 7(c)(2) 5 / 5 it is specifically provided that if there is no students in particular stream then the lecturers are to be posted in the higher secondary school were such students are available and prosecuting their studies. 7. It is also not the case of petitioners that in the schools were petitioners were posted, students of commerce stream are not available and prosecuting their studies. 8. In the aforementioned facts of the case, I do not find any error in the posting of first petitioner at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Dasgrangpur, block and District – Mungeli and second petitioner at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kona Block, District Mungeli. 9. Accordingly, this petition being devoid of substance is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza