1 2026:CGHC:740 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5721 of 2022 1 - Awdhesh Sharma S/o Late Manrakhan Lal Tiwari Aged About 67 Years R/o House No. 06, Aashirvad, Bamleshwari Colony, Borsi District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Its Secretary, Dept. Of Water Resources, H.Q. Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, H.Q. Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Rohitashwa Singh, Dy. GA For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Rajesh Kesharwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board 06.01.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the following relief(s); “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining the concerning matter. 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or suitable direction to the respondents authorities for the grant of the benefit of special pay for deputation/deputation allowance to the petitioner for the period of deputation in the office of Municipal Corporation Bhilai. 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow any other relief as deem fit and proper with cost of petition.” HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2026.01.08 17:08:21 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an employee of the State Government and was working as an Assistant Engineer in the Water Resources Department. On 24.02.2011, he was placed on deputation with respondent No. 3 and continued to work there until 14.08.2017. As per various circulars issued by the State Government, the petitioner was entitled to deputation allowance. Respondent No. 3 was obliged to pay the said deputation allowance, however, the same was not paid. The petitioner ultimately retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2017. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that since the petitioner was on deputation with respondent No. 3, the liability to pay deputation allowance lies with respondent No. 3. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 does not dispute that the petitioner was entitled to receive deputation allowance, however, he submits that a proposal in this regard was sent by respondent No. 3 to respondent Nos. 1 and 2, which has not been acted upon till date. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Be that as it may, taking into consideration the submissions made hereinabove, it is directed that respondent No. 3 shall calculate the admissible deputation allowance payable to the petitioner and pay the same to the petitioner within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any action taken in this regard, he shall be at liberty to approach this Court again. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari