Advocates:
['M/S M VELMURUGAN', '', 'GIRIJA VELMURUGAN', 'K S ELANGOVAN', 'HAJA MUJEEB RAHMAN M MAGESH', 'M STELLA & G GAYATHRI', 'PUDUCHERRY']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13.08.2018

CORAM :

The Hon'ble Mrs.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

W.P. No.20820 of 2018

and W.M.P.Nos.24434 and 24435 of 2018

M.Pounidame

.. Petitioner

-vs-

1.The Director,

JIPMER, Puducherry-605006.

2.The Accounts Officer,

JIPMER, Puducherry-605 006.

.. Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India praying for issue of Writ of Certiorari to call upon the

records pertaining to order dated 08.07.2014 in O.A.No.109 of

2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras

Bench, and the order dated 30.08.2012 of the 2^nd respondent,

quash the same as ultravires.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.M.Velmurugan

O R D E R

(Order of the Court made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.The petitioner has approached this Court against the order

of Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Madras, dated

8^th July, 2014 passed in O.A.No.109 of 2013. By the said order,

the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the O.A. preferred

by the petitioner. The OA was directed against the notice and

order of the respondents stating that in view of the Rules, the

petitioner was not entitled to House Rent Allowance (HRA) and

hence, they would deduct HRA already paid to her in 13

instalments.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The facts briefly stated are as under:

The petitioner is working as a Lab Technician in Department

of Pathology under the first respondent, Jawaharlal Institute of

Post Graduate Medical Foundation and Research, Puducherry

(JIPMER). On 21.03.2003, she got married. Her husband is also

working in the same institution. Thereafter, there were some

differences between the husband and wife and the husband of the

petitioner filed divorce petition in the year 2005. The divorce

petition came to be dismissed on 25.02.2008.

4.It is the contention of the petitioner that soon after the

marriage, as there were differences between her and her husband,

from 02.10.2003 she started residing separately in rented

accommodation and she claimed and got HRA. Thereafter, in 2011,

her husband informed respondent no.1 that she is claiming HRA

and she is not entitled to the same. Pursuant thereto, the

petitioner first received a notice, in which it was stated that

as per Rules, she is not entitled to HRA and hence, the HRA,

which was claimed by her, would be deducted from her salary.

The petitioner gave a representation against the said notice,

which came to be rejected. Thereafter, the final order was

passed. The petitioner then preferred the above mentioned OA

before the Central Administrative Tribunal with the above

mentioned reliefs, which, as stated earlier, came to be

dismissed.

5.The case of the petitioner is that though she got married

on 21.03.2003 to her husband who was also working with

respondent No.1, thereafter she left the house on 02.10.2003 and

she was separately residing from her husband. It is submitted

that in such case, as she was living in a separate rented

accommodation, she should get HRA and no HRA, granted earlier,

ought to have been deducted.

6.The main reason for the Tribunal to dismiss the OA was

Rule 5(c)(iii) of H.R.A.-General Rules and Orders. Rule 5(c)

(iii) reads as under:

5.Conditions for Drawal of House Rent Allowance.

(a) ...

(b) ...

(c) A Government servant shall not be entitled to

House Rent Allowance, if -

i. he shares Government accommodation allotted

rent-free to another Government servant; or

ii.he/she resides in accommodation allotted to

his/her parents/son/daughter by the Central

Government, State Government, an Autonomous

Public

Undertaking

or

semi-Government

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Organization such as a Municipality, Port

Trust, Nationalized Banks, Life Ins