JUDGMENT

B.N. MOHAPATRA, J. — The petitioner challenges the legality of the order dated 24.07.2007 (Annexure-12) passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 1034 (C) of 2003 by which the Tribunal has declined to interfere with the order dated 27.01.2003 passed by the Government in the Department of Water Resources directing the petitioner to retain the quarters No. D/10 located in M.I. Colony, Unit-IX, Bhubaneswar till 30.06.2003 on payment of market rent.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the present case are that the petitioner is a government servant working as Junior Engineer in the Department of Minor Irrigation. While working as such under Minor Irrigation Division, Bhubaneswar at Khurda, he was allotted with quarters No. D/10 located in M.I. Colony, Unit - IX, Bhubaneswar. Vide deployment order dated 28.02.2002 (Annexure-3) the petitioner had been directed to be deployed as Junior Engineer against vacancy in M.I. Section, Laxmipur under M.I. Division, Rayagada. But, Opp. Party No.2 vide its order dated 14.03.2002 (Annexure-4) directed to keep the said order dated 28.02.2002 (Annexure-3) in abeyance. Since the post of Junior Engineer, M.I. Division, Bhubaneswar had been abol¬ished, a stop-gap arrangement was to be made adjusting the peti¬tioner against the said vacancy in the same Division until fur¬ther orders by order dated 21.03.2002 (Annexure-5). In the order of deployment dated 28.02.2002 (Annexure-3) which was subsequently cancelled by O.P. No.2 vide its order dated 28.12.2002 (Annexure-6) it was specifically mentioned that the petitioner was allowed to continue at M.I. Section, Nayagarh. On 31.07.2002 (Annexure-7), the petitioner made a representation to the opposite parties with a request to allow him to retain the quarters in question for that current year. Thereafter, the Superintending Engineer, Central Circle, Minor Irrigation, Bhubaneswar, Khurda (O.P.No.3) vide his order dated 19.08.2002 (Annexure-8) requested the Chief Engineer to allow the petitioner to retain the government quar¬ters in M.I.Colony, Unit-IX, Bhubaneswar at least till the end of that year with usual rent. Subsequently, on 27.01.2003 Government in Water Resources Department vide its order under Annexure-11 considering the representation of the petitioner allowed him to retain the said quarters till 30.06.2003 on payment of market rent. Being dissatisfied with the order passed under Annexure-11, the petitioner filed O.A.No. 1034 (C) of 2003, which was dis¬missed by the Tribunal. Hence this petition.

3. Mr. Budhadev Routray, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the order of deployment/transfer dated 28.02.2002, if the petitioner would have been posted in any other place in the same KBK districts like Kalahandi and Nabarangpur he would have been allowed to retain the said quarters at normal rent, if he so wished in view of Circular/Resolution No. 24003 dated 16.08.2001 on fulfilment of certain conditions, i.e., on the grounds of children’s education and health of family members. In the said resolution, it has been clearly provided that this facility shall be available throughout the State of Orissa including Cuttack and Bhubaneswar. The above policy decision of the Government is applicable to the petitioner since he was in occupation of the government quarters prior to his transfer in question to KBK districts. The retention of quarters by the petitioner on the grounds health and children’s education with the permission of the Government can never be treated as unauthorized and the petitioner is not liable to pay market rent/five times of Standard License Fee. Therefore, the action of the opposite parties asking the petitioner to pay market rent is arbitrary and contravenes the provisions of Clause 10(ii) of the Resolution dated 18.09.1998 issued by Government of Orissa in General Administration Department under Annexure-9. It was furth