IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1179 of 2022 ======================================================

Bhakti Vinod Pandey, Son of Late Ramakrit Pandey, Resident of Village-

Devkali, P.O.-Bir, P.S.-Dhanarua, District-Patna, Bihar-804451.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The Government of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director Head (Administration), Bihar Health Service, Patna-7.

4. The Superintendent, Nalanda Medical College and Hospital, Agamkuan, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rama Kant Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Mujtabaul Haque, GP-12 Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to GP-12 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

3 16-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs :-

“A. For quashing the office order vide Letter No. 1646, Patna, dated 16/04/2018 as contained in Annexure- 2 issued under signature of Superintendent, Nalanda Medical College and Hospital, Patna-7 by which claim of one time travel allowance(After retirement) of petitioner has not been accepted on the ground that the voucher of the vehicle has not been submitted and further quashing the order dated 03/05/2021 of Lokayukta, Bihar, Patna in Case no. 02/

Public (Health & Family Welfare) 04/2019 as contained in Annexure- 6 by which claim of one time travel allowance(After retirement) of petitioner has been rejected and also for commanding the respondent authorities to immediately provide one time travel allowance to the petitioner who has superannuated on

31/10/2013.

B. For commanding and directions be given to Respondent authorities to immediately provide one time travel allowance with @ 18% interest along with compensation for harassment to the petitioner.

C. And also for any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled in the eye of law.”

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that having retired as Kaksha Sevak (Ward Servant) from the Nalanda Medical College and Hospital (NMCH) on 31.10.2013, the petitioner filed a representation before the respondents on 21.3.2018 praying for payment of travel allowance after his retirement.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in case a person on his retirement moves from his present residential address to his permanent address and the distance is more than 20 kms, the person is entitled for travel allowance. The petitioner residing at a distance of more than 20 kms from his permanent address, he filed the representation praying for grant of travel allowance. A copy of the representation has been brought on record as Annexure-1 to the writ application. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by order contained in letter dated 16.4.2018 of the Superintendent, NMCH, the representation of the petitioner came to be rejected. Even the petition before the Lokayukta, Bihar was also rejected by order dated 3.5.2021. It is these two orders i.e. order dated 16.4.2018 as also the order dated 3.5.2021, which are under challenge in the instant writ application.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that from perusal of the order impugned dated 16.4.2018 it would transpire that except for a representation having been filed by the petitioner making unsubstantiated statements therein, no documents in support of the statements has been brought on record. The representation of the petitioner for payment of the Leave Travel Allowance was rightly rejected. There is no merit in the instant writ application and the same be dismissed.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the contents of the petition, it transpires that much