Smt. Alka Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Deputy Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶13

5 - District Education Officer, Janjgir-Champa Office Of District Education Officer- District- Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh

¶14

6 - Principal Government Higher Secondery School Hardi, District- JanjgirChampa Chhattisgarh

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Sahil Singh, P.L.

¶17

HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE

ORDER ON BOARD

06.04.2026

2 / 4

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

¶22

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction and quash and set aside the transfer/posting order dated 12.06.2025, issued by the Deputy Director, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Government Higher Secondary School, Arjuni, Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa to Government Higher Secondary School, Patthalgaon, District Jashpur;

¶23

10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction andquash and set aside the impugned order dated 12.09.2025 passed by the Divisional Level Rationalization Committee, Bilaspur, whereby the representation of the petitioner has been arbitrarily rejected;

¶24

10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction anddirect the respondents to consider and accommodate the petitioner against a suitable vacant post of Lecturer (Chemistry) in District Janjgir-Champa, strictly in accordance with Clause 10(7)(2) of the Rationalization Policy.

¶25

10.4 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction and direct the respondents to grant parity to the petitioner with similarly situated candidate, namely Smt. Rashmi Khare, who has been granted posting against a vacant post;

¶26

10.5 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction and declare the counselling processes dated 07.06.2025 and 21.07.2025 as arbitrary and illegal, to the extent they violate the prescribed policy and deny fair consideration to the petitioner;

¶27

10.6 Any other relief or reliefs that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.”

¶28

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly placed one another Lecturer’s representation was considered by the State Level Committee and had allowed the same vide order dated 27.11.2025.

¶29

3 / 4

¶30

Petitioner who is also holding the post of Lecturer (Chemistry) and belongs to the female category upon her posting on rationalization policy filed writ petition before this Court and during pendency of that writ petition, a representation is also filed before the Divisional Level Committee which came to be rejected without appreciating the grounds raised by the petitioner in an appropriate manner. Petitioner thereafter had submitted representation / appeal before the State Level Committee in accordance with the clauses under the rationalization policy, however, the State Level Committee headed by the Director, Public Instructions had forwarded the representation / application submitted by the petitioner before Divisional Level Committee again. Petitioner has taken a specific ground that at the time of counseling, the procedure prescribed under the rationalization policy has not been appropriately followed as the petitioner being a female lecturer has not been given preference to choose the vacant place for her posting. He submits that when once the Divisional Level Committee had already taken decision, no purpose would be served for again forwarding his application / representation before same committee and therefore, direction be issued to the State Level Committee headed by the respondent No. 2 /3 to take decision on the representation of the petitioner against her posting under the rationalization policy.

¶31

3. Counsel for the State submits that he has sought instructions in the matter, particularly the pleadings made in the application about forwarding of the representation submitted by the petitioner before State Level Committee to the Divisional Level Committee again. According to his instructions, representation submitted by the petitioner

¶32

4 / 4

¶33

will be considered by the State Level Committee headed by the respondent No. 2 / 3, at the earliest, within a further period of 10 days.

¶34

4. On due consideration of submission of counsel for the respective parties, nothing remains for this Court to adjudicate into the matter at this stage and therefore, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing respondent No. 2 / 3 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner against the order of Divisional Level Committee, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the Order.

¶35

5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

( Parth Prateem Sahu ) JUDGE

¶38

Saurabh

Smt. Alka Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Alka Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanwal Singh Poya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pradeep Kumar Vasnik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vikas Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemlata Sonant Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Yogmaya Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

John Pradeep Lakda Vs State of Chhattisgarh