IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, KOHIMA BENCH
L.S. JAMIR, J.
Dr. Vivek Paliwal - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India and others - Respondents
W.P (C) No. 61 (K) of 2016
Decided On : 09-06-2017
Government Married Accommodation – Rent Allowance – Public Service Commission – Learned counsel for petitioner submits that while the petitioner was posted at Kashmir Valley, he was covered under Kashmir Valley Package as provided by Office Memorandum and therefore, at fag end of his tenure in the Kashmir Valley he had opted for SPR and kept his family at Lucknow which was also permitted by respondents his posting from Kashmir Valley to Tawang petitioner was also informed that there was only single officer accommodation and no schooling facility and therefore petitioner continued to keep his family at Lucknow (SPR) and as such, the petitioner is entitled to HRA as provided under Office Memorandum – Held, Petitioner prior to his transfer from Kashmir Valley to Tawang had declared Lucknow as his SPR which was also permitted by the respondents and therefore, it shall be deemed that petitioner had keep his family outside North-Eastern Region in his declared SPR – Court has also considered communication written by HQ 763 BRTF and addressed to petitioner wherein, it has been clearly stated that HQ 763 BRTF is lacking married accommodation and Schooling facility was for this reason that the petitioner had no option but to keep his family in his earlier declared – Writ petition is allowed.
L.S. Jamir, J.
1. Heard Ms. R. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Z. N. Ngullie, learned C.G.C appearing for all the respondents.
2. On being selected by the Union Public Service Commission, the petitioner joined Border Road Organization (BRO) as Medical Officer Grade-2 on 09-03-2000. He was posted to HQ CE (P) Beacon located in Srinagar under Kashmir Valley on 03-11-2007. While being posted under the Kashmir Valley, the petitioner was covered by the Kashmir Valley Package provided by the Office Memorandum dated 27-03-2009. The petitioner was allotted Government Married Accommodation with effect from 17-11-2007 and he had resided with his family at the Kashmir Valley. Thereafter, on 09-03-2011, as provided under the Office Memorandum dated 27-03-2009, the petitioner opted for the Selected Place of Residence (hereinafter referred to as "SPR") on 09-03-2011 and declared Lucknow as his SPR. The declared SPR (Lucknow) was permitted by the respondents and therefore, the petitioners kept his family at Lucknow. While the petitioner was keeping his family at the declared SPR, he was posted out from Srinagar on 02-04-2011 to report to HQ 763 BRTF located at Tawang (Arunachal Pradesh). After his arrival at Tawang, the petitioner was allotted single officer accommodation for the full tenure i.e. from 02-04-2011 to 13-01-2014. By a communication dated 14-02-2011 written by the Headquarters 763 BRTF, the petitioner was also informed that the station is lacking married accommodation and schooling facility. Thereafter, the petitioner was further posted out from Tawang to Headquarter CE (P), Sewak, Dimapur on 14-01-2014. While the petitioner was posted at Tawang, no HRA was granted to the petitioner as provided by the Office Memorandum dated 22-07-1998. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
3. Ms. R. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner was posted at Kashmir Valley, he was covered under the Kashmir Valley Package as provided by Office Memorandum dated 27-03-2009 and therefore, at the fag end of his tenure in the Kashmir Valley, he had opted for the SPR and kept his family at Lucknow which was also permitted by the respondents. Thereafter, on his posting from the Kashmir Valley to Tawang, the petitioner was also informed that there was only single officer accommodation and no schooling facility and therefore, the petitioner continued to keep his family at Lucknow (SPR) and as such, the petitioner is entitled to HRA as provided under the Office Memorandum dated 22-07-1998. It is submitted that prior to his posting out from Kashmir Valley and as permitted by the respondents, the petitioner had exercised his option to keep his family at Lucknow (SPR). Therefore, in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 22-09-1998, the petitioner is entitled to HRA during his tenure at Tawang inasmuch as, he has been posted from the Kashmir Valley to the North Eastern Region and that his family was kept in his last place of posting/SPR.
4. Mr. Z. N. Ngullie, learned C.G.C appearing on behalf of all the respondents on the other hand, submits that while the petitioner was being posted at the Kashmir Valley, he was provided Government Accommodation and he resided in the Kashmir Valley with his family. Therefore, as he has been posted to the North-Eastern Region, the petitioner is not entitled to HRA inasmuch as, the Office Memorandum dated 22-07-1998 provides only for those civilian central employees who are posted from outside the North-Eastern Region and who continue to keep the family at the last duty station shall be entitled to HRA. In the present case, as the last place of posting of the petitioner is Kashmir Valley and as his family is not being kept in the last duty station, the petitioner is not entitled to HRA. He further states that on his posting from Tawang to Dimapur, the petitioner has been provided with family accommodation and he is residing wi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.