GAHC010243902025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WA/394/2025 GS NO 180368HNTD MAHENDER SINGH S/O. LATE SAWAL DAS, R/O.- ROWSHAN BIHAR, LAKSHMI NAGAR, DIST.-

MATHURA, UTTAR PRADESH, PIN- 281001. PRESENTLY POSTED AT 91 RCC, GREF C/O-99 APO, CHIEF ENGINEER H.Q., PROJECT VARTAK, TEZPUR, PIN-

784001.. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.

THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, R. NO. 101-A, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110011.

2:THE JOINT SECRETARY (BORDER ROADS)

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE WING

4TH FLOOR SENA BHAWAN DELHI CANTT.

NEW DELHI- 110011.

3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF BORDER ROADS HEADQUARTER DGBR SEEMA SADAK BHAWAN RING ROAD NEW DELHI-110011.

4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER (PROJECT) VARTAK C/O 99 APO TEZPUR ASSAM PIN-931716 For the appellant/petitioner(s) : Mr. I. H. Saikia, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M.R. Adhikary, CGC B E F O R E –

–

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

11.02.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

The appellant, who is a driver in the General Reserve Engineer Force (GREF), seeks arrears of Bhutan Compensatory Allowance (BCA) or, in the alternative, Daily Allowance for the duties performed by him in the territory of Bhutan during the period between 2006-2009.

While the appellant was posted at Guwahati, he was directed to perform duties in Bhutan as a part of the project “Dantak”, a border roads project.

The contention of the appellant is that for approx. 26 months between 2006 to 2009, he drove carrier-vehicles from India to Bhutan and within Bhutan territory. This was an extended deployment, which was very akin to foreign duty, entitling him to BCA, which is a special allowance provided to personnels serving in Bhutan, to compensate higher living cost and hardships. Hower, BCA was not paid to him on the ground that he was never posted substantively in the territory of Bhutan but he was only asked to drive carrier-vehicles from India to Bhutan for a period of three years.

That apart, the records reveal that the responsibility to drive carrier-

vehicles to Bhutan was only a temporary arrangement without proper posting and not requiring the appellant to stay in Bhutan for the afore- mentioned period of three years. He had to drive on and off from India to Bhutan which, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, only entitles the appellant for Daily Allowances.

Mr. M. R. Adhikary, the learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that he would like to take instructions whether the appellant was entitled to Daily Allowances and whether it was paid to him.

Let such instructions be taken and put on record by the next date.

Re-notify on 25.03.2026 JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

Comparing Assistant