^ F. HJGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BtLASPUR WRIT PETITK3N (S) N0. S746 OF 2008 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS 2. Shriniwas Sharma, S/o Shri Ramnidhi Sharma, aged about 42 years, Posted as Accountant, Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority, Biiaspur (CG). Versus State of Chhattfegarh, through the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, BHapsiir (CG). Collector, Bdaspur, Dtstrtet Bilaspur (CG). (Wr'rt petition under Articte 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satlsh K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri A.N. Pandey, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate appears as amlcus curiae. ORALORDER (Passed on this 26th day of November, 2008) Wfth the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parti^, the petition is heard finally. 2) By this petition, the petitloner seeks a direction to the respondent authorrties for a!lotment of Government r^identia! accommodation to the petitioner or atternatively to consider his representation for allotment of Government resjdentiat accommodation. 3) Shri A.N. Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the Member Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Legat Services Author'rty by letter dated 23-7-2008 has recommended to the Collector, Biiaspur, for allotment of Government restdentia! accommodation to the petltioner. Desplte the recommendation made by the Member Secretary, the Collector has not ajlotted the accommodatlon to the petitioner. N a ISw:^ 1.1 1 :itf 4) Per contra, Shri Shashank Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the State/respondents, submits that the petitioner was allotted the Government residential accommodation No.LIG-164, Deorikhurd, Bilaspur, by order dated 12-2-2007. The petitioner declined to accept the allotment of said accommodation on the ground that there were certain problems in the accommodation e.g. there was no electricity connection, water connection and some windows were a!so broken and also the accommodation was at the corner of the colony. The petitioner by his letter dated 28-2-2007 (Annexure-P/10) addressed to the Collector made tt clear that the accommodation allotment order dated 12-2-2007 may be cancelled and the petitioner may be considered for allotment of other Govemment residential accommodation. Learned counsel further submits that in Bilaspur there is a shortage of Govemment residential accommodations, even the senior officers are not allotted the accommodations. The case of the petitioner was considered and accordingly allotment was made by order dated 12-2-2007, but the petjtioner has declined to accept the said allotment. Now the case of the petitioner would be considered after altotments to other candidates are made. 5) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the docyments appended thereto. From the record, it appears that the petitioner Is claimjng the Govemment resldential accommodation as a matter of right !n the facts situation of the case when there is a shortage of Govemment accommodations. the case of the petitioner cannot be conskiered on priority basis, as the petitioner has already declined to the accept the allotment order dated 12-2-2007. Thus, this petition being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge