1 2026:CGHC:8655 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1838 of 2026 1 - Smt. Purnima Shrivastava W/o Anurag Shrivastava Aged About 50 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) Maths, E-Cadre At Govt Middle School Mohalai, Block Durg, District Durg (C.G.) --- Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instructions, Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Deputy Director Public Instructions, Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Divisional Joint Director Education Division Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 5 - Collector Durg District Durg (C.G.) 6 - District Education Officer Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 7 - District Education Officer Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : Mr. C.J.K. Rao, Advocate BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 For Respondents/State : Mr. Abhishek Singh, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 18/02/2026 1. With the consent of the parties, this petition is heard finally. 2. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 03.02.2026 (Annexure P-1). 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 20.06.2025 (Annexure P-5), order dated 28.11.2025 (Annexure P-6) and order dated 23.12.2025 (Annexure P-8). 10.3 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 Govt. Middle School Adarsh Girls Kawardha, Block Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.). 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work in the Govt. Middle School Mohalai, Block Durg, District Durg (C.G.) or at any school nearby District Durg (C.G.). 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that pursuant to the order dated 07.06.2025, petitioner who was working as Teacher (Maths) E-Cadre and posted at Government Middle School Mohali, District – Durg is transferred to the Government Middle School Adarsh Girls, Kawardha, 3 Block – Kawardha, District Kabirdham under rationalization policy of the State Government. He contended that in the school, in which petitioner has been transferred is upgraded school named as Swami Atmanand Excellence School, which is managed by society. He contended that petitioner has submitted representation before the Divisional Level Committee stating that under rationalization policy, teachers who are working in the Government School could not be transferred and posted at the Swami Atmanand Excellence School. Divisional Level Committee considering the grievance raised by petitioner allowed the representation, however, instead of passing an order of posting of the petitioner afresh at Divisional Level has directed the District Education Officer/District Level Committee to pass an appropriate orders for posting of petitioner, which is erroneous. It is contention of learned counsel for petitioner that once petitioner who is initially posted at Durg district and considered for his posting at divisional level and therefore, if the posting of petitioner is found to be erroneous, then rectification can be made by the same Committee i.e. Divisional Level Committee, because petitioner will have an opportunity to be posted within the division, which also includes the district where petitioner was posted earlier. 4. Learned State counsel submits that application submitted by petitioner was considered and grievance was accepted. Divisional Level Committee, headed by Divisional Commissioner has directed the District Level Committee/District Education Officer to rectify the defects and pass appropriate orders of the posting, therefore, there is no error in the decision taken by the Divisional Level Committee. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and also perused the documents placed on record. 6. As of now grievance of petitioner is that petitioner is deprived for his option to be taken at the divisional level. He contended that prior to issuance of order of transfer under the rationalization policy, petitioner was posted within District Durg, which falls within Durg Division. The order of transfer and posting under rationalization policy is only after counselling process, displaying the schools at Divisional level with vacant post. Petitioner at first instance was posted by Divisional Joint Director, Durg Division and therefore, corrective orders ought to have been passed by the Divisional Joint Director so that vacant post of Maths teacher could be identify within the entire division, which may also be at Durg district or nearby district. 7. I find some force in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, because before the Divisional Joint Director, list of schools in which the post of Teachers (Maths) lying vacant in the entire division will be available and petitioner will have an opportunity to opt for suitable place of posting. More so when posting of petitioner is under rationalization policy where State Government decided to post surplus teachers in school. Posting is to be made identifying the schools where posts are lying vacant, granting teachers an option to choose place of posting from available school during counselling process. 8. In the case at hand, initial order of posting of petitioner under rationalization policy is of Divisional Joint Director of Durg Division, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, respondent No.4 committed an error in directing respondent No.7 to pass an order of posting of 5 petitioner at appropriate school (at district level), which will be within the Kabirdham District only. By this process, petitioner is deprived of his right of choosing better place of posting according to the policy of the State Government. 9. For the foregoing discussions, the order Annexure P-1 is not sustainable and accordingly, it is quashed. Respondent No.4 is directed to conduct counselling process of petitioner at Divisional Level and thereafter to issue an order of posting of petitioner in accordance with law. 10. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram