IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.50 of 2008 BIRENDRA PRASAD SINHA …. PETITIONER Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ….. RESPONDENTS For the petitioner : - Sri Shravan Kumar, Sr. Advocate Sri Rajiv Nayan Sinha, Advocate For the respondents : _ Sri Sarvadeo Singh, C.G.C. ----------- 3. 22.10.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for Union of India. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even if petitioner is held not entitled for reimbursement for travel by air, according to the stand of the Union of India available on the records of the case, since the petitioner became entitled for a pension of more than Rs.5,100/- per month with effect from 1.1.1996, he should have been reimbursed for expenses of travel by AC Ist at least and not for travel by AC II as has been allowed. It goes without saying that if the policy of the Union of India permits AC Ist fare for those having pension above Rs.5,100/- per month with effect from 1.1.1996 then petitioner’s claim for expenses of travel at least on the basis of Act Ist fare for the journey undertaken on 24.9.1996 and 11.2.1998 must be considered on its own merit in - 2 - accordance with the aforesaid policy decision. With this observation and direction, this review petition is disposed of. DKS/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)