IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.16792 of 2025

Decided on: 02.12.2025.

Maya Devi …..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P and others .....Respondents ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate

oGeneral, Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Ms

Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocates

CGeneral and Mr. Rajat Choudhry,

Assistant Advocate General for

respondents.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Petitioner is serving as clerk in the office of

iDeputy Director, Elementary Education, Bilaspur, District

Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. An office order was issued by respondents on 01.05.2025 directing the petitioner to pay rent for the government accommodation in her possession for the period 27.02.2024 to 27.01.2025 @₹2834/- per month after adjusting the license fee already paid by her. The aforesaid order was followed by office memorandum dated 03.07.2025 clarifying that petitioner is liable to pay

Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

penal rent for the government accommodation w.e.f. 27.02.2024 to 27.01.2025. Hence, total deduction of ₹31,174/- would be made from her salary towards penal rent w.e.f. 01.08.2025. Petitioner represented on 22.05.2025 against imposition of penal rent upon her under office order dated 01.05.2025. Respondefnts next issued an office order on dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P-11) directing the petitioner to deposit penal rent in terms of office order dated 01.05.2025. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking following substantive reliefs:-

“(a) That the impugned order dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P-11) and entire recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

(b) That the respondents may be directed not to make any recovery from the petitioner in pursuance to Annexure P-11 or any other orders of recovery.”

2. The gist of the petitioner’s grievance was noticed in the following order passed in this writ petition on

14.11.2025:-

“Petitioner feels aggrieved against the directions issued to her on 03.07.2025 (Annexure P- 8) in respect of deducting Rs.31,174/- from her salary w.e.f. 01.08.2025 on account of penal rent for the Government accommodation in her possession. Penal rent is being recovered from the petitioner for the period 27.02.2024 to 27.01.2025 on account of her owning a private house and receiving rent by letting it out. Inviting attention to office memorandum dated

21.09.2010 (Annexure P-2 with the application), learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case, income from own house does not exceed Rs.12,000/- per month, penal rent is not appPlicable, only normal license fee is payable.

Considering the fact that recovery for the month of October, 2025 has already been effect from the petitioner, reply/instructions be positively filed/obtained by the next date of hearing.

List on 25.11.2025.”

3. Pursuant thereto, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 26.11.2025, from Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur, H.P.

which inter alia convey as under:-

“It is submitted that as per memorandum dated 21.09.2010 rental liability of house owing official at or near the station of their posting if income from own house does not exceed ₹12,000/-

hper month then normal license fee is payable.

However, as per rule mentioned supra, it was gmandatory for petitioner to notify the fact regarding purchasing of new house and income therefrom to i the Estate Officer in shape declaration but the petitioner failed to submit the same and she immediately submitted the said declaration when inquiry was being conducted against her. Hence, the penal rent has been rightly imposed on the petitioner.”

4. Since according to the petitioner, rental income f