The definition of 'same station' for House Rent Allowance purposes includes contiguous areas, justifying the denial of HRA due to the husband's government accommodation.

ORDER

PER:- AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER [JUDICIAL]

1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties with consent through video conferencing mode.

PRAYER

2. By way of present Original Application filed under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, applicant has sought the main relief (as extracted from the OA) as under:-

“1. To quash and set aside order passed by the Dy. Commissioner, KVS Regional Office, Ranchi, dated 13.04.2021.

2. The Respondent authority may be ordered/ directed to pay the deducted and recovered amount along with statutory interest within stipulated time period.

3. A heavy amount of cost shall be awarded upon respondents for dereliction of duties, wantonly misinterpretation and ignorance of rules and misusing power and abusing their official position especially by Mr. Shashikant Sharma, the Administrative Officer-cum-PIO, KVS Regional Office, Ranchi (Respondent No.3) and dragging applicant in mental agony, harassment and put in burden of heavy financial loss in filing two Original Applications bearing No.294/2021 and present application.”

FACTS IN BRIEF

3. Briefly stated facts as adumbrated by applicant in the instant OA are that applicant is working as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) and transferred at K.V. Surda in April, 2018. Applicant is staying at Dharambahal Tola Laldeeh, Ghatsila in rented house. Applicant was also drawing House Rent Allowance (HRA) @ 8% of basic pay since joining at Surda from April, 2018.

4. It is also the case of applicant as set out in the OA that respondents stopped HRA since January, 2020. Thereafter again started from March, 2020 till August, 2020 disbursement of HRA to applicant. The private complaint was made. The respondent no.4 issued Impugned Order dated 24.12.2019 (Annexure 4-B) to stop HRA. The Disciplinary Authority also served Memorandum of Charges under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 [hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1965].

5. Per contra, respondents/KVS has filed written statement that applicant Smt. Poonam Srivastava wife of Shri A.K. Srivastava, Qtr. No.5/19, Type-IV, Uranium Corporation of India Limited (In short UCIL) Colony, Jadugoda, Jharkhand filed applications under R.T.I. with address of place of government residence allotted to her husband. The applicant was sought to clarify vide letter dated 24.12.2019 that once husband of the applicant is allotted a government accommodation in UCIL Colony, Jadugoda about 13.2 kms from K.V. Surda within same station and both Surda and Jadugoda are under same Mosaboni block contiguous–adjoining and should not be paid HRA as per rules. The case of the applicant was referred to KVS (HQ). Assistant Commissioner (Finance), KVS (HQ) and after reasonable opportunity to applicant vide impugned order dated 13.04.2021, clarified regarding payment of HRA to applicant. KVS (HQ) has also clarified that under Rule 5(c) (iii) of HRA Rules and Orders – husband of applicant allotted accommodation at same station by an Autonomous Public Undertaking or semi-government organization, whether he/she resides in the accommodation or resides separately in accommodation rented by him/her. So also clarified in impugned order that phrase “Same Station” for grant of HRA has been given under G.O.I. Orders (2) under Rule 5 of HRA Rules - prescribes that “same station” phrase under Rule 5(c) (iii) of this Ministry’s OM dated 27.11.1965 includes all places which are treated as contiguous to the qualified city/town in terms of Para 3 (a)(i) and those dependent on qualified city/town in terms of paras 3(b)(i