GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON KANDARPA KANTA SARMA V/S THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

GUWAHATI, India, June 16 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on May 15:

1. Heard Mr. M. P. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the N.F. Railway.

2. The petitioner has put to challenge the impugned Judgment & Order dated 30.01.2015 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench in Original Application No. 119/2003, rejecting the prayer made by the petitioner for payment of House Rent Allowance (HRA) for the period from 25.09.2007 to 13.07.2009. The impugned judgment and order had been made on the ground that despite there being vacant Type-IV quarters which could have been allotted to the petitioner instead of grant of HRA in terms of the Government Circulars applicable to the petitioner, the petitioner had not applied for allotment of the vacant quarters. Thus, in terms of the Government Circulars the petitioner could not be eligible for grant of HRA.

3. The petitioner filed the present writ petition and the same was disposed of, vide judgment dated 21.05.2018, wherein this Court held that there was nothing on record to indicate the basis on which the decision to pay HRA from 14.07.2009 was taken and there was also nothing to show the actual vacancy position of Type-IV quarters during the relevant period of time. Further, the Railways had failed to give any convincing answer to the query as to how 15 officers referred to in the departmental communication dated 23.03.2011, who were enjoying identical Pay Scale as the petitioner were permitted to draw HRA during 25.09.2007 to 14.07.2009, if Type-IV quarters were in fact lying vacant during the time. This Court thus directed the respondents to pay the HRA of the petitioner from 25.09.2007 to 13.07.2009.

4. Subsequent to the above the Union of India filed Review Petition No. 9/2019 challenging the earlier judgment and order of this Court dated 21.05.2018 on the ground that the two issues raised in the writ petition were available with the authorities, yet the learned council for the Railway Authorities had failed to point out the same before this Court. It was pointed out in the Review Petition that there was a proper explanation as to why the 15 officers were allowed to draw HRA, which was on account of the fact that they belonged to a separate Division of the N.F. Railway vis Construction Line of Railway and they were under different administration, which authority was not impleaded as a party to the writ petition, as a result of which correct information could not be placed before this Court. Further there were materials to show that vacant quarters in Type-IV category were in fact available during the relevant period and therefore the said aspect of the matter should have been placed before this Court. It may be also stated that in the meantime the N.F. Railway had paid the HRA amount claimed by the petitioner in terms of the order dated 30.01.2019 passed in the Review Petition, wherein it had been held that the respondent would make payment of the dues of the petitioner which would be subject to further orders that may be passed in the Review Petition.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=7yg5D%2FmJmLJFbv9l4Wl3vX9edJCAlmSUO4xMN8oOj76PNbQhQulAiqKhhh2VaCbw&caseno=WP(C)/2576/2016&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010014322016&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.