ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT CHANDRACHUD, C.J. AND YASHWANT VARMA, J.
BHIM SINGH SAGAR ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS .....Respondents
(Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 29913 of 2015, decided on 11th August, 2015)
By the Court.—Invoking the jurisdiction in a PIL, the petitioner has challenged the legality of a Government Order dated 11 February 2015 regulating the payment of house rent allowance where both the spouses are employees of the State and are residing together in one accommodation either owned or rented. Prior to the issuance of the Government Order, there were earlier Government Orders dated 15 December 1981, 28 February 1984 and 28 April 2000 which stipulated that where both the spouses are employees of the State and reside together in one accommodation, house rent allowance would be allowable to one of the spouses. This regime has now been altered by the Government Order dated 11 February 2015 which stipulates that though both the spouses may be residing together in the same accommodation, each of them would be entitled to the payment of house rent allowance as allowable to them under their respective entitlements in service. This was sought to be challenged by the petitioner on the ground that it imposes a heavy burden on the State exchequer.
2. The second prayer by the petitioner in these proceedings is for a direction to the State to effect recoveries from its employees for the period prior to 11 February 2015 where the house rent allowance was claimed by both the spouses who are employees of the State and reside in the same accommodation.
3. In response to the petition, a counter-affidavit has been filed by the Principal Secretary, Finance to explain the genesis of the Government Order dated 11 February 2015. Employees of the Union Government who are engaged in an All India Service are governed by the All India Services (House Rent Allowance) Rules, 1977. On 8 November 1988, the Union Government in the Ministry of Finance issued an office memorandum clarifying the position in regard to whether house rent allowance would be allowable where both the spouses are in an All India Service under the Union Government and reside in the same accommodation. A policy decision was taken by the Union Government that no restriction should be imposed on the claim of the normal house rent allowance by each of the spouses who happens to be a member of an All India Service merely because they reside together in the same accommodation. The memorandum, insofar as is material is extracted hereinbelow:
“Subject : Drawal of House Rent Allowance by husband and wife when both of them happen to be Government servants and are living in hired/owned accommodation-Clarification regarding.
.-.-.-.-.
The undersigned is directed to say that pursuant to revision of rates of HRA on the basis of recommendations of the 4th Pay Commission clarifications were being sought from this Ministry by Ministry of Railways etc. regarding admissibility of house rent allowance to husband and wife when both of them happen to be Government servants. After having the matter considered in consultation with Staff Side of the National Council (JCM) the President is pleased to decide that no restriction should be imposed only on the ground that husband/wife is also a Government servant and is living together in the hired/owned accommodation. In such cases normal amount of HRA may be granted to them as per their entitlement subject to fulfillment of other conditions for drawal of the allowance.
2. In so far as the persons serving in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department are concerned, these orders issue after consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.”
4. Though the Union Government had taken this policy decision on 8 November 1988, the State Government took a rather long period of time to decide upon the admissibility of house rent allowance to both spouses when they happen to be Government servants and are living together in hired or, as the case may be, owned accommodation. On 7 March 1996, the State Government issued an office memorandum clarifying that where both spouses are officers of an All India Service but are deputed to the State Gover
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.