HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BIIASPUR PETITIONER RESPONBENT8 WRITPETmONfS) No. 659 < : Vijay Sharma, Aged aboirt 22 years, Constable No. 635, son of Shaokar Prasad Shanna, R/o PBfiee Quarter No. 17, Poliee Line Bilaspur C.G. "VERSUS.,-, . " 1"'11 • : I. State of Chhattisgarh, Threugh: Secretary, Depar(meHtbfHQme,D.K.£!&ayai^^ 2. Director Gerieral of Police, Poliee Head-quartf RaipurCG. ' "': :'' : - -.::-"- .~\-. ^.^..^...--^.^- •. 3. Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Raage, ^BUaspurCG. :,.,,,, " : .: ' ::, ^'"•":,""::::' .,'';;;^ 4. SuperintendentofPolice, Bilaspur, CG. 5. SuperiHtendentofPoHce,BalrafflpiB' Py Balrampur Police DistrictCG . ? - WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA 8B: Hon'Me SBri Sattsh K. Asnihotal, J. '-^ Pfesent: ShriSaleemKaz,i,Advocatefcrtfafipetitioner. SliriAlokBakshi,<^vemm^^ ORALOROER ^ (Passed on 01'"' day of Fehruary, 2008) Leamed counsel appearing for the petitionersubmits that the petitioner working&s Constable and pwted at Balrampur, anaxal affectedarea, is entitled to allotment of house at aay place in the State of Chhattisgarh. Leamed counsel for the petitioner farther submits that flie qyarter N0. 17 in Bilaspur, altotted eariier to the fafher ofthe petittoneT,fw}io was an Assistant Sub Inspector, be altotted to him in accordance wiAthe circulardated 30.10.2004 (Annexure P/2) Having heari leamed coimsel andhaviag perused fhepleadings and the documents appended thereto, rt is evident that ftie petitioner is entitled to allotment ofhouse ariywhere ia the State ofChhattisgarh during his posting m fhe naxaI-afFected area.In fhe event house for all^ment is not availabie, the petitionerwould beetititled tohQUsereHtailowance._ ^WKS's.s^UfSSSSKKa'tSiSssSSaSl^SSstti^^S^SSSSSS'^S ^StSXSSiliS L^itufc ^^ c^) 3. Qnquery, leamedcounsel isnotinapositiontoshowanywherethatthe house allotted to the father of the petitioner who was working as Assistant Sub Inspector in Bilaspur District, eau.be allotted to l&e petitioner as he is holding the post of Constable in the police . departmenit. — . s.;! 4. Shri Bakshi, leamed Govermnent Advocate appearing for the State/respondents submits Ihat in the eveiit, house is not avaiiable for allotment anywhere in the State, the petitioner would be entitled to house rent allQwance as per ciroular dated 30.10.2004. The house allotted to the father of flie petitioner, who was holding a higher post, caimot be allotted to him. 5. Leamed counsel for the respondeirt/State further submits that if aay ofher house, befitting to the post bfthe petitioner is available, Ihe same vrill be considered for aUotmenl. In the event, it is not available, the petitionerwill be entitled to hbuse rentallowaace. 6. In view of the foregoing, no writ or direction ean be issued to the authorities to allot the house. Even otherwise, entitlement for allotment ofhouse is neither legal nor statutory ri^it. The petitioner is entitled to house rent allowance iHabsenceofallotment ofhouse. 7. Accordingly, lliis petition stands disnaissed.No order asto costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge '^^r^