Entitlement to House Rent Allowance based on the nature of the accommodation enjoyed and recovery of excess HRA after retirement.

JUDGMENT

Moushumi Bhattacharya, J. - The petitioner retired as the assistant Headmistress of Balurghat Girls High School upon attaining the age of superannuation on 30th June 2017. The petitioner has challenged a decision of the District Inspector (DI) dated 14th May 2018 by which the petitioner was directed to refund the House Rent allowance (HRa) on the basis of salary drawn in excess. The petitioner also claims a direction on the respondents to release her pensionary benefits along with accrued interest.

2. according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner had to take accommodation in the building adjacent to the school which was maintained by the school authority and was in the nature of a private arrangement. Counsel submits that the petitioner paid rent to the school for the accommodation. Counsel relies on a resolution of the Managing Committee dated 26th February 2009 which decided that the teachers who opted to stay at the Teachers Hostel would have to pay for the maintenance and renovation including electricity charges. Counsel places a letter of the President of the School dated 24th September 2016 which informed that HRa would be deducted from all those residing in the school hostel. Counsel relies on 2 unreported decisions of this Court to submit that the impugned decision of the DI cannot be legally permitted since such decision was taken long after the petitioner retired from the School.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayers in the Writ Petition on the ground that the petitioner used to live in the accommodation constructed and maintained by the Government and denies that the said building was maintained by the school authority. Counsel submits that the issue involves disputed questions of fact which cannot be entertained in a writ jurisdiction. Counsel relies on Director, Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kesaragod & Ors. Vs. M. Purushothaman & Ors.; 1994 Supp (3) SCC 282; for the proposition that HRa is a compensatory allowance and cannot be used as a source of profit.

4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. The documents disclosed in the writ petition must first be mentioned. It should also be pointed out that the State did not file any affidavit in opposition to the writ petition. The issue which falls for decision is whether the petitioner is entitled to House Rent allowance by reason of the nature of accommodation enjoyed by the petitioner while she was serving in the concerned school.

5. The undisputed fact is that the petitioner paid rent for the accommodation provided by the school which would be evident from the rent receipt annexed to the petition. The documents are described as 'Rent Receipt for School Quarter' including those from October 1999 onwards. The records of House Rent paid by the teachers include the name of the petitioner. The letter of the Headmistress of the School dated 3rd October 2016 states that costs of repair of the school hostel were recovered from the teachers who stayed in the premises vide Resolutions of the Managing Committee dated 14th September 2007 and 26th February 2009. The letter further states that HRa has been allowed in entirety to such teachers and that two teachers have got their pension without any issue being raised about HRa. The aforesaid letter has been referred to by the DI in the letter dated 21st December 2016 in which the DI has admitted that he is unable to decide on the issue of HRa to the petitioner since documents pertaining to the nature of the land could not be traceable. The DI admits that maintenance and other charges of the hostel were borne by the teachers and most important, that the hostel building is the property of the school. The DI also advises that the HRa may be treated as overdrawal and adjusted accordingly.

6. a letter from the Deputy Director of School Education dated 24th October 2017 (signed on 18th October 2017) states that recovery of HRa was justified on the