1. Government servants overstaying official accommodation after retirement — Levy of penal rent under Orissa Service Code — Challenge to validity of penal rent exceeding standard rent. (Para 3 )
Back
Next 
1996 Supreme(SC) 1745
1996(8) Supreme 378
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and S.P. Kurdukar, JJ.
State of Orissa & Ors. etc. -Appellants
versus
Sadasiva Mohanty -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 14534 of 1996
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9272 of 1994)
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 14542-14547, 14537, 14541, 14540, 14539, 14536, 14535/96 @ SLP (C) Nos. 9273-78, 14606, 8336, 17195, 16791 of 1994 and 1389 & 1173 of 1996)
Decided on 25-10-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : P.N. Misra, Advocate.
For the Respondent : K.N. Tripathi, Janaranjan Das, K. Vishwanathan, K.V. Venkataraman, Advocates.
Important Points
The Supreme Court held that the Government is entitled to charge penal rent at five times the standard rate for Government servants who overstay in allotted quarters beyond the permitted four-month period after retirement, as per the Orissa Service Code, specifically for houses in Cuttack and Bhubaneswar.
Subject
Administrative Law - Government Housing Allotment
Act Referred
ORISSA SERVICE CODE: R.11, R.104
SERVICE LAW: .
SERVICE LAW: .
Headnote
SERVICE LAW-Orissa Service Code-Rule 11-Over stay of retired Government servants in Government allotted houses beyond maximum period of four months-Penal rent of 5 times the standard rent levied-Challenged-Rule providing for such Govt. servant to be charged rent at the rate of five times the standard rent prescribed under the Rules-Appendix to Rules had no bearing-Tribunal was illegal in its conclusion that Govt. was not entitled to levy penal rents. (Para 6)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. State contends Rule 11 of Orissa Service Code permits five-times standard rent for overstay; respondents argue no power exists to fix such penal rates. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. Government is empowered to collect penal rent beyond four months' overstay per Orissa Service Code and related proceedings, except where specific regulations are limited to certain locations. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 )
4. Penal rent at five times the standard rate is leviable for overstaying government accommodation beyond the permitted period, provided such power is prescribed by rules. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 )
5. Appeals allowed; penal rent upheld for specific city quarters, but denied for quarters in other locations lacking specific penal rent regulations. (Para 7 , 8 )
6. Can the government charge penal rent for overstaying official accommodation after retirement?
Yes, under the Orissa Service Code and related proceedings, government servants who overstay beyond the maximum permitted period, generally four months, can be charged penal rent at five times the standard rent. (Para 5 , 6 )
7. Does the power to levy penal rent apply uniformly to all government quarters regardless of location?
No. If the regulations prescribing penal rent are specifically limited to certain locations, the government cannot levy such penal rents for quarters in other locations unless general rules or directions are issued. (Para 7 )
8. Does the Appendix to the Rules regarding standard rent prevent the levy of penal rent for overstaying?
No. The Appendix deals with special circumstances, such as fraudulent allotments or unauthorized use of out-houses, and does not override the general power to levy penal rent for overstaying beyond the permitted period. (Para 6 )
ORDER
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
2. These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar made on 25.5.1992 in OA No. 1549/90 and batch.
3. The admitted position is that all the respondents are Government servants. They were allotted Government houses in Bhubaneswar and Cuttack during their tenure of office as Government servants. On their retirement, they did not vacate the premises, though their allotments have been cancelled. Consequently, the Government had charged them with penal rents of 5 times the standard rent prescribed under the ORISSA SERVICE CODE . When they challenged the levy in the Tribunal, it held that the Government have no power to assess damages by way of penalty in excess of one time standard rent. Therefore, the order passed by the Government is not valid in law. Mr. P.N. Misra, learned counsel for the State, contends that the view taken by the Tribunal is contrary to Rule 11 of the ORISSA SERVICE CODE , (for short, the Code ) which contemplates that a Government servant, after retirement, if he over-stays beyond the maximum period of four months as provided under the Rules, is required to pay penal rate of rent at the rate of 5 times the standard rent charged for the period of occupation of the quarter beyond four months. The view taken by the Tribunal is not correct in law.
4. Mr. Janaranjan Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondents relying upon Appendix to the rules, contends that the Government have prescribed the procedure for allotment of the house and for utilisation, the Government servants are required to pay standard rent fixed for the house. In other words, there is no power to fix five times the standard rent for overstay.
5. The question, therefore, is; whether the Tribunal s view is correct in law? It is seen that under Rule 104 of the Rules, the Government have reserved its power to regulate the allotment of the houses, subject to the terms and conditions, as may be regulated under the instructions issued in furtherance thereof by the Government. Rule 11 deals with allotment of the house to the officers either owned by the Government or leased by the Government, as the case may be. Rule 2(ii) provides, by general or special order, for fixing fee in excess of what is prescribed in clause (b) referred to earlier. Clause (6) provides that where the Government servant does not vacate the residence, after cancellation of the allotment, the Government is empowered to collect penal rent. For that, procedure has been laid down by the proceedings of the Government dated December 12, 1986. Therein Clause (2) adumberates that a Government servant who cannot vacate the quarters, for genuine reasons of health or other absolutely compelling reasons, may retain the quarter for a further period of one month only, with the prior written permission of the Director of Estates on advance payment of standard rent fixed for the quarter. In other words, the Government servant after retirement/transfer is required to vacate the quarter except for genuine reasons with prior written permission of the Director of Estates. He shall be entitled to retain the quarter only for a period of one month that too on paying in advance the standard rent. Clause (5) envisages that a Government servant after retirement may be allowed to retain the quarter occupied by him for a maximum period of four months as provided in the Rule of the Code on advance payment of normal rent for four months. But his DCRG will be released only after he vacates the Government quarter. Rent at the rate of five times the standard rent will also be charged for the period of occupation of the quarter beyond four months.
6. Thus, it could be seen that a Government servant, after he ceases to be the Government servant, is required to vacate the premises after the expiry of four months, subject to his paying the standard rent as prescribed under Clause (5). If he overst
