ORDER S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This application has been preferred by S.K. Sinha, on behalf of Jharkhand State Auditors Association, Ranchi. It has challenged the Circular No. 206 dated 8th December, 2001 issued from Finance (Audit) Department, State of Jharkhand, whereby and whereunder, it is informed that the members of the Senior Auditors and other Officers of the Finance Department will get travelling allowance/ daily allowance, as per Government of Bihar, Finance Departments Order No. 1524 dated 10th March, 2000. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the Travelling Allowance (T.A.) is being paid as per the provisions of the Bihar Travelling Allowance Rules. Stipulation has been made under Rule 69 to provide T.A. to the employees of the State, However, the T.A. for auditors of Finance (Audit) Department was enhanced since 1st October, 1965, as per Rule 70 of the Bihar Travelling Allowance Rules, vide letter No. 5452-FA dated 28th September, 1965. Therein, Auditors of Finance (Audit) Department were provided 50% additional T.A. than the T.A. as applicable to the Govt. employees under Rule 69 of the Travelling Allowance Rules. It continued for years together as was reiterated vide Government of Bihar, Finance (Audit) Departments letter No. 11495 dated 18th November, 1978. The members of the petitioners Association were, accordingly, paid 50% more than the T.A. as laid down under Rule 69 for other employees. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Governments Resolution No. 1524 dated 10th March, 2000 which was issued by the Finance Department of the Government of Bihar relates to the State Government employees, in general, and cannot be made applicable for the members of petitioners Association who have been allowed 50% additional of the T.A., as per statutory decision taken on 28th September, 1965, reiterated vide decision dated 18th November, 1978. 4. The respondents in their counter affidavit have opposed the prayer in support of a decision as communicated, vide letter No. 206 dated 8th December, 2001. 5. The Bihar Travelling Allowance Rules was initially framed in the year 1949. Rule 69 therein was substituted by Memo No. 8352 F, dated 2nd December, 1986. Rule 70 of the said Rule was substituted by G.S.R. 48, dated 9th May, 1974 w.e.f. 1st March, 1974. Thus, it will be evident that neither Rule 69 nor Rule 70 of the T.A. Rules are statutory, in nature. 6. Rule 69 therein was substituted by Memo No. 8352 F, dated 2nd December, 1986. Rule 70 of the said Rule was substituted by G.S.R. 48, dated 9th May, 1974 w.e.f. 1st March, 1974. Thus, it will be evident that neither Rule 69 nor Rule 70 of the T.A. Rules are statutory, in nature. 6. In the aforesaid background, if by letter dated 8th December, 2001, on creation of State of Jharkhand, It decides to give T.A. as per Government of Bihars Order No. 1524 dated 10th March, 2000 to the Auditors of the Finance Department and other Officers of the State Departments, the petitioner cannot allege violation of any statutory rules. 7. I find no reason to interfere with the order dated 8th December, 2001. 8. The writ petition is dismissed.