iyir ftf-Nc (^2)^^^ IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR PETITEONER W.P.fSlNO. fSf2- /2011 B.R. 6upta, S/o Rambrichh 6upta, (Retd. Employee) aged about 62 years, R/o Village- Kanti Prakashpur, Post and Tahsil Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.6.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^^^ ^ .^y<^^t ^<s^y^"' tei -••1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through; Secretary, Public Health Department, Mantralaya, &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.). -2. The Chief Medical and Health Officer, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.). 3. Block Medical Officer, Public Health Centre, Bhafauli, Tahsil Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTETUTION OF INDIA. The petitioner named above, most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under:- DETAILS OF THE PETETION 1. PARTECULAR OF THE PETETIONER: As mentioned above given in the cause title: 2. PARTECULAR OF THE RESPONDENTS: As mentioned above given in the cause title: 3. PARTECULAR OF THE CAUSE / ORDER A&AINST WHICH iii>,\ K^ >\^ sss. HIGHCOURT ORCHHATTISGARH : Bll-ASPUR WRIT PETITION (SrNO. 1372 OF 2011 Petitioners Resoondents B.R.Gupta Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petttton under Article 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- ShriGovind Dewangan.Advocateforthepetitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate for the State. r ORDER(ORAU (Passed on 14th day of Mareh, 2011) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petltioner submits that dumg couree ofservice ofthe petitioner, the petitioner had gone from one place to anotherplace from January, 2005 to February, ^X)7 on official work andthe petitioner is entitled to traveling altowance for the same. The petitioner retired from his service on 31.5.2008 on superannyation, but no payment of traveling allowance have been made till date, despite several representations made to the respondent No-2. 2. According to tearned counsel fpr the petitioner, the petitioner has made a representatJonon2T.12.2(X)8 (Annexure P-3) and thereafter several reminyers were also sent. 3. Shri Dubey, leamed counsel appearing for the State/ respondents submits that the claim of the petitioner, shall be decided, as early as possible, in accordance with law, and the same sliall be released w'thin a period of sb< weeks, if the petttioner is entitled to traveling allowance on production of necessary arid relevant documente, in law. 4. tn view of for^oing, leamed counsel forthe petitioner submits that nothingremains for adjudication at this stage. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dispcreed of. ashok