Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.07.15 10:50:56 +0530 2025:CGHC:31811 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4747 of 2025 1 - Ramchandra Uraon S/o Manbodhiyaram Uraon Aged About 50 Years Occupation - Headmaster, Government Primary School Durpa, Block Division Katghora District- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
Legal Reasoning
2 - Director Public Instruction Directorate Chhattisgarh First Floor, C-Block Indravati Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director Education Department Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Korba District- Korba (C.G.) 5 - Secretary District Rationalization Committee (District Education Officer) Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 6 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Revenue) Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 7 - Block Education Officer Korba District- Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Shubham Tripathi, Advocate Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 19/06/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition against the order dated 31-05- 2025 (Annexure P-1) whereby the services of the petitioner have been transferred from the Girls Primary School, Durpa, Block Katghora, to Primary School Mudmisni, Block Podi-Uproda, under the Rationalization instructions dated 02-08-2024. The petitioner prayed for the following reliefs in his writ petition:- 10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash the impugned order dated 31/05/2025 (ANNEXURE P/1) which relates to order of transfer of the petitioner 145 kms away from the present place of posting i.e. from Government Primary School Durpa Block Division Katghora to Primary School Mudmisni Block Division Podiuprora. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to post the petitioner at the nearest Vacant Single Teacher Primary School in accordance with law i.e. at Primary School Purani Basti Korba. 10.3 That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice along with cost of the petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was an Assistant Teacher (LB) and was promoted on 18-08-2024 to the post of Headmaster, and he was posted at Primary School Paturiyadand, Block Podi-Uproda. He challenged his posting order in the W.P.(S) No. 5447/2024,
Decision
which was disposed of on 05-09-2024 with the direction to the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner. Thereafter, he was posted at Primary School, Durpa, Block Katghora vide order dated 29-09- 2024. On 28-04-2025, the Primary School, Jahrajel, is merged with the 3 Primary School Durpa. Since the Headmaster of Primary School, Jahrajel, was senior to the petitioner, the petitioner has been declared surplus and has been transferred. He would further submit that clauses D-3 and 6 of the Rationalization instructions have not been followed by the authorities, and the complete details of the schools have not been displayed, and the petitioner was deprived of selecting the school of his choice. As per clause 10.4, the equal numbers of the teacherless /single teacher schools to the numbers of surplus teachers should have been displayed, but certain schools were concealed. The petitioner has filed his representation on 06-06-2025, but the same has not been considered till date. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner was posted at Primary School, Durpa. As per clause 1-B of the Rationalization instruction dated 02-08-2024, two Primary Schools are to be merged if their distance is less than 500 meters and less than 30 students. The Primary School, Jarhajel, had 20 students, and Primary School Durpa had 53 students; therefore, Jarhajel school was merged under the said clause 1-B. As per clauses 6(1) and 7-A(4) of the said Rationalization instruction, the Headmaster, who is junior, would be declared as surplus. The petitioner was joined as Headmaster on 03-10-2024, whereas the other Headmaster, Ashok Nayak, had joined on 29-04-2010; thus being the junior, the petitioner is declared as surplus, and there is no irregularity in rationalization of the petitioner. The Rationalization Instructions have strictly been followed, and considering the entire circumstances under the Rationalization Instructions, the petitioner has been declared surplus and has been transferred. There is no ground available to the petitioner to challenge his transfer order, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available in the petition. 5. The petitioner, who is the Headmaster, has been transferred to the Primary 4 School, Mudmisni, vide transfer order dated 31.05.2025 under the Rationalization Instructions. It is not in dispute that the Primary School, Jehrajel, was merged with the Primary School, Durpa, vide order dated 27- 05-2025 and the Headmaster of Primary School, Jehrajel, is senior to the petitioner. The list of surplus teachers has been prepared as per clause 6(1) of the Rationalization instruction, and the petitioner, being the junior, is declared as surplus as provided under clause 7-A(4) of the said instructions. The grounds raised by the petitioner that all the teacherless/single teacher schools have not been displayed at the time of counselling, are also not available to the petitioner because the list of schools was published as per the procedure enumerated under clause 10 of the Rationalization instruction dated 02-08-2024. This court does not find any infirmity in declaring the list of schools under clause 10 of the Rationalization instruction dated 02-08-2024, which warrants interference of this court. 6. The dispute raised by the petitioner is factual, which cannot be decided in the writ jurisdiction. It is a trite law that transfer/posting is an incidence of service; the Court should not interfere with the transfer/posting order, unless there is malice, infringement of statutory rules and regulations. The employees may be posted anywhere at the instance of the employer in the public interest and administrative exigency. Further, it is for the government to post another person if any vacancy arises on account of the transfer/posting of an employee. [see Airport Authority of India v. Rajiv Ratan Pandey and others, 2009 (8) SCC 337 and Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and others v. G. Ratnam and others, 2007 (8) SCC 212 and also Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and others v. State of Bihar and others, 1991 Suppl. 2, SCC 659]. Further, from the documents annexed with the petition and the instructions submitted by the respondents/State, this Court do not find any scope of interference in this petition. 5 7. In view of the above settled legal position and also in the facts and circumstances of the case, no case for interference with the impugned order is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. sagrika Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge