1 CGHC010371422022 2026:CGHC:41405 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5110 of 2022 1 - Pritam Lal Nayak S/o Shri Ghurau Ram Nayak Aged About 46 Years R/o - Vilage And Post Chadan Block Kasdol, District - Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Department Of Veterinary Services, Indiravati Bhavan, Block - 3 Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Department Of Veterinary Services, Indiravati Bhavan, Block - 3 Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Deputy Director Department Of Veterinary Services, Baloda Bazar, District - Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) 4 - Panjab National Bank Branch Baya, District - Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) ( Cause title taken from CIS Periphery) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 3 /State : Mr. Abhishek Gupta, P.L. RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Yash Tripathi appears on behalf of Mr. Shivang Dubey, Advocate SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 23/09/2026 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 To issue an appropriate Writ/Order and direct the respondent authorities to disburse the reaming amount of subsidiary to the petitioner as per his eligibility under State dairy entrepreneurship development scheme in the alternate account number holding by the petitioner in respondent no.4 bank i.e. A/C no. 2768000100038049. 10.3 To issue an appropriate Writ/Order and direct the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner within an outer limit of 15 days. 10.4 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the earlier account was closed as the petitioner had opted for a cash credit account and, accordingly, he opened a new account. It is further submitted that the petitioner is operating the said account and, therefore, the benefit of the subsidy may be extended to him by transferring the amount to the said account. 3 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State submits that the reliefs sought by the petitioner cannot be granted, as, under the scheme, the subsidy amount can only be transferred to the DBT account of the beneficiary. It is submitted that the petitioner has closed the said account and has opened another bank account and, therefore, the subsidy amount cannot be transferred to the newly opened account. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to submit an appropriate application along with a certificate issued by the concerned Bank before the competent authority. Upon receipt of such application, the competent authority shall consider the same and take an appropriate decision thereon, in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that the observations made by this Court in the present order are only for the purpose of disposal of the present petition and shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ruchi