Sanjiv Khanna, J.

These two writ petitions by Ashes Kiran Prasad and the Union of India (through Secretary Railway Board); Member Staff-Railway Board, General Manager, North Frontier Railway and General Manager, North Western Railway, impugn a common order dated 13th November, 2014, passed by the Principal Bench, Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi (Tribunal, for short) and, hence, are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The impugned order passed in OA No.4241/2013, filed by Ashes Kiran Prasad (hereinafter referred to as ‘employee’) directs that for the period 30th October, 2003 to 26th October, 2007, when the employee was posted on promotion at North-West Frontier Railway, Gauhati, in the Senior Administrative Grade, he would be entitled to payment of House Rent Allowance (HRA) at the rates applicable at Patna on the basic pay paid to the employee in the Senior Administrative Grade. The Union of India was accordingly directed to calculate the difference in the HRA payable, and pay the same within three months from the date of the order. The Union of India is aggrieved by the aforesaid order. The employee, on the other hand, is aggrieved by the finding of the Tribunal that he would not be entitled to payment of HRA on his transfer to Jaipur, in the North-Western Railways (NW Railways) with effect from 27th October, 2007 as he was in occupation of government accommodation.

3. The employee is an officer of the Indian Railway Traffic Service and was posted at Patna in the East-Central Railway (EC Railways) before being transferred to Gauhati in the North-East Frontier Railway (NF Railway) on promotion to the Senior Administrative Grade. The employee joined the posting at Gauhati and remained posted there from 30th October, 2003 to 26th October, 2007, when he was transferred to North-Western Railway, at Jaipur.

4. The employee claims that while at Hajipur, Bihar, he was drawing HRA of Rs.2015/- calculated at the rate of 15% of his basic pay in the scale of Junior Administrative Grade. The claim, which has been accepted by the Tribunal, was that on being promoted and posted at Gauhati in the Senior Administrative Grade, HRA should be based and computed on enhanced basic pay in the promotional post.

5. Consequent to promotion of the employee to Senior Administrative Grade and posting at Gauhati, the employee was given government accommodation at Gauhati. However, the employee continued to get payment of HRA at Hajipur, Bihar in terms of the policy applicable to officers posted to the NF Railway that they would be allowed to retain the allotted quarter at the previous place of posting or the employee would be entitled to draw additional or second HRA at the same rate as paid prior to the officer being posted in the NF Railway.

6. The submission and reasoning, which has been accepted by the Tribunal, is that HRA is paid on a specified percentage of basic pay and this amount would increase every year on account of annual increments or on further promotion and, therefore, HRA would not remain static or fixed. HRA would increase with increments or when the basic pay is increased. It is pointed out that in case the employee had been promoted and was granted Senior Administrative Grade at Patna and was thereafter transferred to Gauhati in NF Railway, he would have drawn a higher HRA. The policy, relied upon by the Union of India, was iniquitous and falls foul of Article 14. Prior to the posting at Gauhati, when the employee was posted at Hajipur in the East-Central Railway, a controversy had arisen as to whether the employee should be paid HRA at Patna rate, where he was residing, or as applicable and payable at Hajipur, Bihar. The Patna rate was higher than the HRA payable at Hajipur. The employee’s claim to HRA payable at Patna rate was accepted by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna and the Patna High Court