Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1411

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
Ravinder Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others - Respondents.
CWP No. 5418 of 2024
Decided on : 15-10-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with L.N. Sharma, Addl. Advocate General, Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General & Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General Mr. K.S. Dhaulta, Advocate

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 rule of law; prior change applications not inferior to fresh ones.

Headnote:(A) Himachal Pradesh Allotment of Government Residences (General Pool) Rules, 1994 - Rules 7, 8(7), 13 - Allotment of government accommodation - Out-of-turn allotment permissible where exigencies of service warrant but vested exclusively in House Allotment Committee - Principal Secretary lacks authority to allot on executive directions bypassing Committee - Applications for change in accommodation considered on first-come-first-served basis without debarment merely for existing allottee status - No unfettered discretion; must adhere to prescribed procedure, equality and rule of law - Arbitrary, hasty allotment ignoring prior applications quashed. (Paras 4(iv), 4(vi), 4(vii), 5)

(B) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Judicial review of administrative action - Discretionary power in allotment not extra-constitutional or unfettered; exercised reasonably, transparently within rules - Extra-constitutional directions (e.g., notes marked 'as per direction') improper, violative of natural justice and legitimate expectation - Public power as trust for larger interest, not whim or favouritism. (Paras 4(iii), 4(vi), 4(vii))

Facts of the case:
Petitioner, a serving driver already allotted Type-II accommodation, applied on prescribed proforma under Rule 13 for change to specific Type-II set vacating in February on retiree's superannuation, citing medical needs of aged mother. Three others applied similarly prior. Respondent 3, another driver without government accommodation, applied same day (05.01.2024) for out-of-turn allotment citing service exigency via certificate from superior; processed same day on note 'issue as per direction of higher authority', allotted by Principal Secretary ignoring prior applications and without Committee deliberation. Re-categorization to Type-III later affirmed by Chief Secretary. Petitioner filed writ seeking quashing.

Findings of Court:
Impugned allotments arbitrary, procedurally flawed; directed reconsideration of all applications including petitioner's and respondent 3's per rules, prior decisions emphasizing transparency and first-come-first-served, within four weeks; costs of Rs.50,000/- imposed.

Issues: Validity of out-of-turn allotment bypassing House Allotment Committee on executive directions; discrimination against prior change applicants vis-à-vis fresh applicant; whether existing allottee debarred from change consideration.

Ratio Decidendi: Rules prescribe manner for out-of-turn allotments exclusively by Committee; non-adherence renders action illegal. No absolute discretion to prefer fresh allottees or act on extra-constitutional notes; change requests for genuine cases under Rule 13 entitled consideration without prejudice. Arbitrary exercise shocks conscience, violates equality, rule of law.

Result: Writ petition allowed; allotment communications dated 05.01.2024 and 16.03.2024 quashed and set aside.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's prior applications for accommodation change ignored (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)

Judgment :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

Petitioner seeks quashing and setting-aside of the office communications dated 05.01.2024 (annexure P-3) and 16.3.2024 (annexure P-6) whereby Set No.28 GF, Dispensary Block, Type-II, Barnus Court, Shimla was allotted in favour of respondent No.3.

2. The case

Petitioner and respondent No.3 both are serving as Drivers in the H.P. Secretariat, Shimla. Petitioner is deployed with the Deputy Chief Whip of Himachal Pradesh, whereas respondent No.3 is deployed with Officer on Special Duty (OSD) to the Hon'ble Chief Minister. From the pleadings and submissions made for the parties, following factual position emerges:-

2(i). Petitioner is in possession of government accommodation Set No.161, Type -II, Block (T), Nabha Estate that was allotted to him on out of turn basis on 06.01.2018.

It is the case of the petitioner that his aged mother had been battling cancer. The accommodation allotted to him was not on the road side. It also had stairs thereby making difficult for his mother to move and posed hindrance in her treatment. He, therefore, on 21.06.2023 made representation through proper channel for change of the accommodation.

According to the respondents, the application so moved by the petitioner on 21.06.2023 was not on prescribed proforma. Further, this application of the petitioner for allotment of specific government accommodation by way of change had been moved too early as compared to the date of its availability as according to department instructions dated 16.04.2016, request for change of government residence with regard to a particular set could be considered only three months before the retirement of official in possession of the said accommodation.

2(ii). Petitioner thereafter, moved for change of government residential accommodation on 01.12.2023. This application was moved on prescribed proforma under Rule 13 of the Himachal Pradesh Allotment of Government Residences (General Pool) Rules, 1994 (‘Allotment Rules’ 1994 in short). Petitioner requested for allotment of Set No.28 GF, Dispensary Block, Barnus Court, Shimla. The aforesaid accommodation was in possession of one Sh. Vijay Shastri serving as Driver in H.P. Secretariat and due for superannuation in February, 2024. The petitioner requested for change in his residential accommodation by the aforesaid accommodation on its vacation by Sh. Vijay Shastri. Besides the

petitioner, three other employees of the respondents i.e. S/Sh. Baldev Raj (Driver, H.P. Secretariat), Tek Ram Sharma (Jamadar, H.P. Secretariat) and Mohd. Rafi (Sr. Assistant, H.P. Secretariat) had also applied for change in their allotted government accommodation and inter-alia for allotment of Set No.28 GF. Sh. Baldev Raj had requested for out of turn allotment citing his present accommodation being small. Sh. Tek Ram had requested for out of turn allotment on the ground of accommodation allotted to him being not suitable. Sh. Mohd. Rafi had requested for out of turn allotment on the ground of his being a kidney transplant patient and applied for the accommodation being more suitable to him.

These representations preferred by four employees including the petitioner were deliberated upon by the respondent No.2- the Director of Estates to Government of Himachal Pradesh and forwarded to respondent No.1- Principal Secretary (GAD) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh on 16.01.2024.

2(iii). While the applications of the petitioner and three others were being processed, in a parallel move, an office letter was issued on 05.01.2024 (Annexure P-3) by the office of Principal Secretary (GAD) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to respondent No.2 conveying the approval of government to allot government accommodation, i.e. Set No.28 GF, Type II in favour of respondent No.3 on out of turn basis under Rule 8(7) of the Allotment Rules, 1994.

2(iv). On 17.02.2024, the respondents re-categ