Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
Amitabh Gautam – Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors. – Respondents
CWP No.2138 of 2025
Decided On : 30-04-2025
(A) Himachal Pradesh Allotment of Government Residences (General Pool) Rules, 1994 - Earmarking of houses - The House Allotment Committee (HAC) was directed to earmark accommodation for specific officers, which it did on 02.09.2024, designating Set No.1, Type-VI, Talland for PCCF (HoFF) - Petitioner contested the legality of this earmarking, claiming prior allotment of the same house to him on 20.05.2023, which was conditional upon its vacation by the existing occupant - The court found that the HAC acted within its authority and that the petitioner had no vested right to the accommodation. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 5)
(B) Natural Justice - The court held that principles of natural justice were not violated as the petitioner was given an opportunity to present his case, and the earmarking was a lawful exercise of HAC's functions. (Paras 3(i)(a), 4(v))
(C) Allotment Discretion - The court affirmed that the allotment of government residences is at the discretion of the state, to be exercised in accordance with applicable rules. (Paras 3(ii)(a), 4(iii)(a))
JUDGMENT :
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.)
Petitioner and respondent No.4 are seniormost members of the Indian Forest Service. Petitioner is currently posted as Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Wildlife), Himachal Pradesh, whereas respondent No.4 is the seniormost Indian Forest Service Officer posted in the State of Himachal Pradesh as Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (‘PCCF’) Head of Forest Force (‘HoFF’). Their tug of war in the instant petition is for Set No.1, Type-VI, Talland, Shimla.
2. Background
2(i). Petitioner, after serving the Central Government, joined the respondent-State in the year 2022. He was allotted Set No.4, Type-VI, Mist Chamber, Forest Colony, Khalini, Shimla, on 16.07.2022 and accordingly occupied the said premises.
2(ii). On 22.07.2022, petitioner applied for change of accommodation as under:-
“8. Choices for change of accommodation.
(a) Talland – To be vacated by Sh. Ajay Srivastava post-retirement.
(b) Mandir Colony – Vacated by Sh. Surender Sharma & Smt. Archana. Allotted to Dr. Pawnesh Sharma on vacation.
(c) Mandir Colony – Allotted to Sh. Sanjay Sood on vacation.
(d). Mist Chamber – Allotted to Sh. R.K. Gupta on vacation.”
On the recommendations of the House Allotment Committee (‘HAC’) on 14.03.2023, petitioner was allotted Set No.2, Type-VI, Talland. However, the said allotment was cancelled on 28.03.2023.
2(iii). On 12.04.2023, petitioner requested the PCCF (HoFF) for allotting him Type-VI residence at Talland, Shimla that was allotted to and in occupation of Sh. Rajiv Kumar, the then PCCF (HoFF) on its vacation by him.
Petitioner’s request was placed before Sh. Rajiv Kumar, the then PCCF (HoFF). The request was approved. The matter was directed to be placed before HAC on 19.05.2023. The meeting of HAC was convened on 19.05.2023 itself. The Committee considered the application of the petitioner for allotment of Set No.1, Type-VI, Talland, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as ‘the house’) and decided to allot the said accommodation to him on its vacation by the present incumbent, i.e. Sh. Rajiv Kumar, the then PCCF (HoFF). The allotment letter was accordingly issued to the petitioner on 20.05.2023 with the rider that the said accommodation will be allotted to him as and when vacated by the present incumbent (Sh. Rajiv Kumar).
2(iv). Sh. Rajiv Kumar, the then PCCF (HoFF) was to superannuate on 31.07.2024. The accommodation in his possession was allotted to the petitioner on 20.05.2023. It is a matter of record that Sh. Rajiv Kumar, the then PCCF (HoFF), was permitted to retain the Government accommodation in his possession even beyond his superannuation. He retained the accommodation till 31.01.2025.
2(v). In the meanwhile, the respondent-Forest Department decided that HAC was to carry out its functions in accordance with State General Administration Department’s notification dated 01.04.1998 viz.:-
“1. Allotment of Houses on out of turn basis.
2. Categorization/re-categorization of houses.
3. Recommendation regarding revision of House Allotment Rules to be made to Govt. and issue of infrastructure thereunder.
4. Earmarking of houses for various officers.
5. Cases of second change/exchange of allotment under the rules.”
2(vi). For carrying out above functions, meeting of HAC took place on 02.09.2024 (Annexure P-11). The committee decided to earmark following accommodation for specific designation of officers:-
| “Sr. No. | Accommodation | Designation of Officer to whom earmarked |
| 1 | Set No.-1, Block-I, Type-VI at Talland. This accommodation has been set aside & utilized by successive Heads of Department in the past except a few exceptions. This is the most appropriate accommodation of HoD as the office of HoD is just nearby which facilitates in office working for the Head of Department. | PCCF (HoFF), HP |
| 2 | Set No.-4, Block-I, Type-VI at Mist Chamber, Forest Officers Colony | PCCF (Wildlife), H.P. |
| 3 | Set No.4, Block-I, Type-VI at Temple Forest Officers Colony. | MD, HPSFDC Ltd.” |
Following the Committee’s decision, respondents on 26.09.2024 (Ann
The House Allotment Committee has the authority to earmark government residences, and prior allotment does not confer a vested right to claim accommodation not yet vacated.
Out-of-turn government accommodation allotment under exigency must be by House Allotment Committee per rules; arbitrary executive directions bypassing procedure illegal, violative of equality and rul....
Non-acceptance of prior accommodation offer does not exhaust right to one change if authority later grants allotment after scrutiny; cancellation without notice violates natural justice; prior allotm....
[The court established that notices issued without proper authority under the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000, are invalid, and that allottees have a right to equitable treatment in the conte....
Every decision of an administration and executive nature must be composite and self-sustaining one and in that it should contain all the reasons which prevail the official taking the decision to arri....
Petitioners cannot challenge allotment amounts after acquiescing to the allotment orders and making partial payments, as they were unauthorized occupants without valid claims.
House Rent Allowance is contingent upon the acceptance of government accommodation; failure to occupy within 15 days results in forfeiture of HRA.
Point of Law : Power vested by State in a public authority should be viewed as a trust coupled with duty to be exercised in larger public and social interest. Power is to be exercised strictly adheri....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
