1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6296 of 2021 1 - Shesh Narayan Tamrakar S/o Late Shri Kishan Lal Tamrakar Aged About 64 Years R/o Lily Chouck, Purani Basti, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Kesha Mishra W/o Late Shri K. P. Mishra Aged About 64 Years R/o Khatarai Basti, Khamtarai, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - D. I. G (Training) P. H. Q., Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - S. P. (Training) Police Training Centre ( P. T. S) Mana, Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Smt. Rajshri Mishra R/o C/4, Green Land, Vishal Nagar, Telibandha Raipur Chhattisgarh, Posted As S. P. (Training), Police Training Centre ( P. T. S) Mana, Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Shri Radhe Shyam Nagwanshi Presently Posted As D. P. O., R/o B- 15 Basant Cornor, Avanti Vihar, Sector- 2, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Swati Saraf, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate For State : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Additional A.G. For respondents No.4 & 5 : Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25.08.2025 -2- 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s) : “10.1 That, petitioner most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass suitable direction/writ to the respondents for granting HRA along with the interest to the petitioners, which the petitioners are entitled for accordingly. 10.2 That, the petitioners further pray for the entire records of the petitioner's case to be called for. 10.3 Any other relief or reliefs that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted also.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that at the relevant time, the petitioners were working in the Police Department at Police Training Centre, Mana Raipur (C.G.). She would further submit that the petitioners are entitled for House Rent Allowance but said benefit has not been extended. She would contend that the petitioners made various representations but till date they have not been considered and decided. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. They would submit that earlier WPS No.4756 of 2011 and WPS 2773 of 2015 were filed by the petitioners and other similarly situated employees. They would further submit that their representation was rejected by the Superintendent of Police (Training) Institute, Mana Raipur vide order dated 04.10.2021 which has been annexed in the writ petition as Annexure P/6 but said order has not been challenged by the petitioners in the present petition. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 3 5. Considering the fact that the representation made by the petitioners has already been decided by the competent authority pursuant to order passed in WPS No. 4756 of 2011 and WPS 2773 of 2015 and said order has not been challenged, no case is made out for interference. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to avail the remedy available under the law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha