K-:-: R,1 \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BIIASPUR (C.G.) ^^ ^2=3 .____ W.P. No.—/2003 -f PETITI&NER / ^ .^ ^%' _,• ^'^•'A,.-''' ^'^'^9 .^''^ ^yy .^>'?' ^y i^' RESPONDENTS / Dr. D.K. Jain aged about 59 years S/y" late Kochorilal Jain y/o HIG-33, ladhya Pradesh Housing Board / Colony, near Kamala College, Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Department of Education through Principal Secretary D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Principal Secretary, Higher Education Vallabh Bhavan, Bhopal (M.P. 3. Secretary cum Commissioner Department of Higher Education D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT ^- PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22g d2_ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE, OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS: - 3 i)»IHi BIIIIB w PETITIONER RESPONDENTS HIGHCOURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0.529 OF 20Q3 Dr. D.K. Jain Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Varun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State. ORDER (Passed on this 13th day ofOctober, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents authorities to make payments of the necessary amounts/ funds to the petitioner constituting 50% of the travel expenses amounting to Rs.19.400/- with interest at the rate of 18% perannum. 3. Case of the petitioner, in nutshell, is that on invitation, the petitioner attended 27 International Geographical Congress from Washington to Denver, United States of America (USA) from 8-8-1992 to 22-8-1992. The University Grants Commission (for short "the UGC") approved payment of Rs.15,000/-, subject to payment of remaining amount of the total expenditure incurred by the petitioner i.e. Rs.52,497/-. 4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that several representations were made to the State Government, not by the petitioner only, but by the Madhya Pradesh Higher Education Anudhan Ayog also, as is evident from the letters dated 6-4-1992 (Annexure - P/3) and 8-7- 1992 (Annexure - P/6), but till date the expenditur'e incurred by the petitioner in attending the aforestated conference, has not been reimbursed by the State Government. is I'lSigftr' !t!!»i!SalIt' 7. Gowri On a query asto whether the visit of the petitioner to attend the said conference outside the country was approved by the State Government as well as Central Government, no documen-t has been produced. Further, as no materials have been produced, it cannot be held that sanction for reimbursing the expenditure made by the petitioner, by the State Government was granted. It appears that the petitioner, on the basis of the letter of the UGC, attended the conference. Thereafter, made representations to the State Government to grant sanction. It is well settled that before attending a conference outside the country, the Government officer/employee is required to obtain necessary approval as well as financial sanction. In absence of the necessary approval and financial sanction, the State Government is not under any obligation to reimburse the expenditure made by the petitioner. Since no material has been produced, it appears that the petitioner has gone to attend the conference outside the country on his private visit. Thus, no direction, as sought for by the petitioner in this petition, can be granted. As an upshot, the writ petition, being bereft of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order asto costs. Satisfa K. Agnihotri Judge