Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Rajesh C Shrivastava vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 26 June, 2018
§ 1 014.143/2017 I .n-
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI
--_ ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.143/2017 Date of Decisionzilefihune, 2018 CORNM: Hon'ble Shri R. VijaXkumar,'Mmber (A) 1d r Shri Rajesh C. Shrivastava O/o Chief General Manager WTP, "let floor "B" Wing, BSNL Admn Bldg, Juhu Tara road Santaoruz (W) Mumbai--400054 +6 Residing~--201 SBNL staff Qtrs, Panch) Bunglow, Near Sangam Big Cinema % Andheri Kurla Road Andheri Mumbai) 400059. I M ...Applicantb (By Applicant Advocate: Shri.G.B. Kamdi) _
-I I .
Versus._ I +.'
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd _ Through Chairman & Managing Director,- Bharat Sanohar Bhawan H C Mathur Lane Janpath New Delhim11000l.
2. I Chief General Manager, (WTP) I Teleoom Project, BSNL, Admn Bldg.
- B~ wing 1st floor, Juhu Tara Road Santaoruz (W) Mumbai --400054.
3. The Chief General Manager BSNL, Maharashtra Circle, Admn Building Juhu Tara Road Santacruz (W) ' Mumbai 400054. -
4. The Deputy General Manager, BSNL, Teleoom District Raigad, Sector 13, Plot No. 11 Panvel 410206. él l ii % ..........................,._:1._.:1 ......................... ____ "'"'---z._.__... .---»->_,.:1 . . . .................................................
........ .. ..... .. .,_. ........ .. ~... ,.. » , . . . ~ » .. 1 3 __§§§:i:€?§'=
1
2 OA.1-43/2017
an |
|
' J
5." The Asstt. General Manager (L&B~l) '
O/o the Chief General Manager, sswr, Maharashtra Circle, Admn Building, Juhu Tara Road, Santacruz (W) I ' I Mumbai 400054.
.. Respondents (Respondents by Advocate Shri'V.S.IMasurkar), Reserved on : 20.06}2018.
Pronounced on :§ii€%w@iWg» .|:_m ORLEH1 Per:- R. Vijaykumar, Msbmnn (A) 0 El This. application was filed H 17.01.2017 under Section 19 of the Administrative _l Tribunals Act, 1985- seeking the_ following -
reliefs:--
"a). To allow the Original application.
b). This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to call for record of the case and after going through iixa propriety and legality be pleased 'to direct to the respondent ix: settle time clams of JI the applicant for refund.the amount of | damage rent _amounting Bs.1,76,425/--
which was recovered from the salary of the Applicant illegally' and pay the admissible BRA for the period from 27-- 02~2002 to 05--l2--2002. '
c). This 'Hon'ble Tribunal will be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned.'replies dated 14--07*2015 and 07-04-2016 anui declare Tina action of the Respondent is illegal.
d). Direct the respondent ix; pay the 113 % interest cn1 the-amount <n5 damage rent which was recovered illegally. -
.- " " ' - -' ........._.._
E» X -'-'Hm >> '5;-;_:=,'§;§.;_5;§aa_;.=;;.zzs;_z;;= §7{-_1_7_;_1_:Q';E7"'.-1-_1_§-15, we 'l
xxxxx i 5 ' _______________ _ -
- !' " - - '
1
' 3 0.4.143/2017
I
I
e). Direct the respondent ix; pay the
18 % interest on amount i.e. Rs.36637/~
-which is refunded after a period of 10 -
Years. . I
I
I
Hi;I
f). To pass any other just and =1
appropriate _orders this Hon'ble
Tribunal may deem fit, 'proper and
necessary if _ the _ facts and
circumstances of the case.
g). The cost of this original
application please be provided."
2. The facts of the case are that. the applicant's father enqfllxmi while iii service CH1 20.07.1999. Tfima respondents' granted rue; mother, upon, application, time benefit tn? retaining time allotted quarters. previously" allotted to his father as per his category" for two years thereafter from 21.07.1999 to 20.07.2001 which was the maximum_ possible period- as per the provisions of the rules. It appears that the applicant. was" also i'granted compassionate appointmenh as Telecom.Cperating Assistant (TOA) I I w.e.f. 23.01.2001. The applicant was always I E residing with his nwther and thereafter'and was al1otted.=quarters cni 28.02.2001 .relevant ix) his category Bfifiifil was below inns category ix; which bu.-"(B his father was entitled. He had, 'meanwhile, _ applied for regularization of unauthorized I I occupation of his father's quarters subsequent to E I. il I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ''' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' " ':':"?"::"'::'
-- - - - _:5:-Q51?;-§:?§;§E5}§'
-- -- - - §'§.'f.5§':'E.§':-11:?if}:E§'= §_5§E§';IE.EIf;-_;_-.-_-_-Q-_-_-_-_-_-_;.:-_-_\-;;;_-:_E,7:.::::_I;E:_§§,i;I:[5?}§;[:];?E-;;?}_;
.- . -.§,':§_'I;'= _._._._._._,_:_?_E?_=_=_=5_=_f_2_:':;j;1_=5_"=_:-j-§F"&?;§§_@5- , r~:____.._,< -. ._1:W:;._._..,f_-:5-pf;-",3-j;_::~:-j;_§5:3,:-",1;.§;.1;_1;33§_=,_j:;.;§.§: -*:M-;_'-'-;_¢'\._,_ N_.__:_ __ = 1 --re aasea_____eiagrasaaaaaiaeteiiiiifi85%'"' ____ ---;.=--------_;;;--- - _ _ __.._...._.... ,_1.....
g
i
i
. 4 024.143/2017
I
I
I
i
the two years period in an application dated
I
II
II
19.07.2001 inn: this was "Inn: conceded. aThe
applicant: continued ix; remain ill possession Iof
the quarters which had been allotted to his
mother despite issue cHf.notices dated 14.06.2001
(Annexure A-4); an advice was sent by Accounts
Officer cni 15.06.2001 (annexure Zbdh under copy
-II
to applicant; ands further advice. sent on
13.07.2001 (Annerure ~A-6) under I copy to
applicant, -to Innre1 he furnished ani appeal on
18.07.2001 contesting the recovery ordered for
the period. from. 23.01.2001 when Ihe lnni joined
'III. I
E
I
service to 20.07.2001. This recovery period I
related -to theperiod after his appointment on
'Ill
compassionate ground and.innjJ.Iflna date on which the two years permission limit expired. The applicant sent a further appeal on 24.04.2002 for IIi this period and again on 18.09.2002. He had also EII I.III I raised the issue that he had not '-been paid HRA ever' since Inns appointment. 'ln Inns last. letter above he has also mentioned. that he had.It been I E I evicted from time quarters -on 27.02;2002 by"
II evicting his family' members and. by locking it II '.4 III I;| along with household goods,'which had not been removed lay tdni as tni that; date. Thereafter,' an .5_ L E I I I:
I K. .. ~~I< ~ »~ee ""'"Im7%%%%%fi%@@%fi@%Wfi%%%@%¢ I _ 5 OA.1-'13/20.1?
El advice "was sent 'to "the Eh) cs1 24.02,2003 _which appears to have been received by the applicant asking fer teams; of Rs.1,76,425/- less recovered amount . totaling Rs.1,70,981/H, 'from. the applicant. The applicant was also advised by the - Accounts Officer in Memo No.A-9/Pay Bill/Part file/76 dated 23.03.2003 stating that this amount will ins recovered from.tmms salary. 13> this, the applicant Inns 'written to time Chief General Manager on 24.03.2003 (Annexure A"12) asking for- regularization (ME his illegal occupation 'of EI higher type guarters, nonudeduction of BRA and on"
"the evictionecum--sealing of the" quarter -from 26.02.2002. Ina also mentions that.lna had vacated the sealed gparters after getting";U; opened and had extracted. all his. ihousehold. goods_ on 06.12.2002 &umiIna_had been allotted departmental quarters txf Type-11 thereafter. Further, in letter no.A-9/Pay Bill/General. Corr/06~07/45 El dated. 09.06.2006, time Accounts IOfficer res intimated that Ina was not rmnri House Rent.
--Allowance for the period from 26.02.2002 to 06.12i2002 when ins finally vacated.tfina quarters.
Thereafter, the applicant has filed an appeal to _L the' Chief I General Manager on 30.04.2012 +6 III--'III--r'~'---II"mm-HnH-"mm:-"I"-'-'.'::":"w' "-I '"i"'"""-----.-.--.-.-.':_':r-_-;-.;:r;-_..-._-_-_-_: .............................. ..
y.--.\-5-.-;-_,M,I._M.M.___z~~~~~~ ,\ . Y \ ,_,,§:.::_:_.;3.::E¥fi,. :::,:;_E:_\ ,£:_:_____:_:\§_;_'__ W ;__,_:\_\_£_::___J'______________________1?:::m::= _1_ _AH\HM_ . .. . ._.5-§_s._.._I§:F§._-_=-._}:x5_.._;=._.§.__._-.:.§53{€, i >..x._-_._.;>; \,,,,;;;;.;;.;.;;,_¢,{¢;;;;j I _ i i 6 OA.143/2017
-.
(Annexure-A~14) stating that Ina was wrongly charged_ damage rent, denied HRA 'and requested I relief. He also sent. a reminder on 01.06.2012 (Annexure A--15). In response, on 12.03.2013, part of the damage rent relating to the period from 23.01.2001 Ix; 20.07¢2001 for time peritml covered by the-inn) years permission given.ix> his mother for occupation. although Ibasis 111 rules ;u; not mentionedn Tfins applicant Inns thereafter appealed-
for refund.cnf rest of iflns damage ixnn: collected .
in letter dated 25.03.2013, 02.08.2013, 14.11.2014 for "which ti reply" was sent Ix} his supervisor cn1 14.07.2015 ill-l@tt€I_IKL Qtrs~lI/ No.10(D) /JHD/ 2012/ Vol--Il dated 'l4.07.2015 _ (Annexure-A-1) and. email_ sent ix; him on 07.04.2016-(Annerure-A-2). - _ F "3. ,The- applicant has also filed. MA for condonation _ of delayi claiming_ that his representation was decided only in 2016. In regard to delay, he claims that the delay has to "be computed from the letter and email received by him ill 2015 anmi 2016 and Iflnn; his application . .1 made in 17.01.2017 was filed on time.
4, _ .The applicant has approached this
Tribunal seeking tins above reliefs znui has also
._ . . _ ~-
________H """""""" - .
I
i
7 OA.143/2017 . 5
claimed.tjnn; the damage rent vdmrfii was recovered from his salary was against quarters that had not_ been allotted ix: the applicant enni further, BRA Q. had rnn;"been gmnri to Inns applicant. IUi3 appeal for relief Inni been ignored anni finally settled and replied only recently.
5. iflna respondents-tmnma pointed <nn:.that only"aijpart clatn for refund was emtertained in"
the order dated 12.03.2013 and] the .applicant's cause'of action arose as far back as the year 2002 which is subject-to delay and laches. They tuna: also cited several citations ._ ;n1 support"of D their" defence that "this its stale claim. They have also explained. by reference to rules_ for allotment of quarters on the manner in which two 'years permission was granted.to the mother of the -II applicant and that BRA was ~not due to the applicant after his appointment in service due"to his occupation of that flat alongwith his mother.
I I They have asserted.the correctness of the damage rent-for the periods involved. Further, they have stated that the individual was not cooperating in _vacating of the flat 'after I-
completion of two
years and.tmni"Us be evicted. Bis household goods
remained."within time flat. because ins refused."to
.. == _ ' , ..,.. __.. ..--. »- ...~.-.- . """~" """" .. ... _ _ _ _ _. ..,-qfizag, E,-----, -£4 __-1-¢-,-_-_-_-- __ ...... ___
. .. .. , ,_.,;.;.;..__
'!
Ii
i
II
III
8 OA.143/201?
remove them. and. only" removed. them. in December
2002 and ins had lxnnl charged. for time quarters
until actual vacation and until the _gdarters
could be allotted to some other person. They have
a
also referred to his tminging political pressure
through Mr§Nitin Gadkari and Shri Pramod Mahajan, who was Minister-intcharge to support his illegal demands and to pressurize the management to yield to his illegal claims.but these were of no avail.
6. I In his Rejoinder, the applicant has reiterated his main claim that damage rent could not ins recovered from lmmi since he vans not the allottee. . _ " .
7. _ 'During" final hearing 'learned* counsel argued the above point including the-'issues of Inn; citing as clear cause (ME action. iH:"was also mentioned tn; the learned counsel that the.
guarters that were _illegally -occupied by the applicant enni his family, inns situated in Santacruz 1J1 the fheart tn? the §Bombay anui more eligible officials had Io-een_denied this quarter because of time. illegal - occupation cflf the applicant.- _ _ 8, _ l have gone through the O.A. along with Annexures zed. to Ar20. IE have amen; gone through .... .... .... , . . . . . . . .. é i P _ .----v ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \ """"" <?='*<???»:-'~1;=z':*¢>*>=~::
I-'-'.~_-2:." _ _._._ .9 " DA.143/2017
.~ 1 _ .
the .Reply along" with..Annexures Rel Ix) Rr5 "and Rejoinder Reply filed by the applicant and have carefully? examined time official rxfljrgk documents annexed in the _case including rules regarding compassionate appointment. '
9. I have [heard time learned. counsel for-
the applicant and. the learned counsel for the
respondents and have carefully considered the
facts, circumstances, lent points enmi rival
II .
contentions in the case.
10. . The primary objection (Hf the applicant
is that he has been charged damage- rent by
deduction .from "his salary and has not been paid 1
Ihui because lma "was occupying time official
quarters alongwith his mother; It has been
admitted. kn; the applicant that 'Ins obtained '
compassionate appointed based on the death of his
-
father. Tfine purpose cyf compassionate appointment is to provide for a family which is considered to be in indigent circumstances and to.enable it to tide over the sudden crisis that had occurred .
because of the death of the breadwinner. The income from compassionate appointment is intended to relieve the family of its poverty in terms of --.
- - - - - - » - - - ~ - \ - - - -- _-_._-_._._.:}:-_,_::___::________:_,z______Ji?;T_:_:_;_7_-_1Q,;:_-;-;7;1.-;1..;1:__.__::__.m,:._._._,.,,.i_:T___________________u____:\m_::__|-__WM______\__M|_ __________1_-1:-_-1 -_-1:-_v_'_ ml" _____"_-an nu" H _.
:.: ._ . _.-_.-_-: .-_. .:.-._;-.1--.j::_-.-_-;-_-:'_:-.::-= ;-.__:.:_::\__ '::-__-'_.-;:-'_E.'_:-_ -\--fiE::_E::\:'\:'::':.Ei-\E:;:E:.:.:5.§:EEk'\|-I}! :-e: P' \_;~:__: _ _ _ HI __'_ __ __ _ _______ _ _ _ . __ _ * __ _ _ _ _. .. _. ._ __ _ ._ E £_ 3 2 10 oA.143/2017 i iixs needs :&m: food Emmi housing ill addition ixn meeting liabilities of the family. This would include issues such as marriage of unmarried daughter. In. view' of this, having gained appointment on compassionate grounds, the applicant cannot runu turn around anwi clabn that he is IMHZ responsible inn settle iflua liabilities of the familyr in terms of +damage rent arising from unauthorized occupation of official quarter.
Ens will have ix> take both cnf the pleasures and the vicissitudes of time family that exams around such a bounty that he was granted in terms of the grant of -appointment on compassionate' grounds bypassing the legal routes. 0
11. The applicant has evidently been granted an additional benefit of not paying damage rent for the quarters occupied by him in a higher grade than he was entitled for the period from the date of his appointment as TOA up to 20.07.2001 when the two years period for retention of house that was granted to his mother as a special case elapsed. The applicant was clearly run: entitled :fim: higher' grade cu? house which his mother was permitted to occupy as a 2 \\\\\\ < I <\...\_\.____=¢_\.\...,: .................................
\\ "fa. ___ _ \i,\\__
i
11 ' oA.143/2017
special case because of the death of his fatherJ
The applicant was also obliged to make a separate application- immediately upon receipt of his appointment letter to convey this information to tfima estate» authority Em: that. they cmmnui decide and -advise himon his entitlement and the need for him to vacate the house after he secured this employment." From ijma manner in vflmmfll the respondents has refunded the damage rent that has been. initially? collected. from_ijwa applicant for this period and the absence of any explanation or reference to Rules, it would appear that multitude benefits. have Ibeen cenferred cni this family-and it appears from the facts of.the -case that this has been done "because of undue El political jpressure that imns brought ins bear" on the" respondents by the applicant. This "may, therefore, amount to a sheer abuse of the Conduct Rules and this aspect merits 'examination- by
1| respondents;
r. ._ 12» I The applicant "was himself responsible for the developing situation thereafter and when he was asked to vacate, he should done so without
hesitation, It is also apparent that when he was ' 1- ...........-....-..-.._-_,,,,-.-..,.-....-.,._......................_.......................,._..-.,-,,.--.,v.-..-.A..____:3:..;:11.:1.3....,-.....->.,-.,.,.:T.'-_:I---.q=:_-.1;:;_q:.:53$5%;_§,f;.v*E_:_;,~é€_;$¢.-_E,::~_;_;-.3:1§;;-:§_;::::::_ ,5;E_1;;_1;;_33:;.;-1.32%-;-~_-;:___,__v_ ___\_ ___ ___:TqE_,_?r_z_H_1?:....,...,..._,_._F1,_.:,H:_,+_,;::__ _____:::r__ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ir __ _ _____ '__ _
-----------------> 11 E?-"'> *¥<<>¥1' er ass» E | 5 12 OA.1-43/2017 offered an official quarters suited "to his category in December, 2001 he voluntarily refused and can only" blame himself for the_ subsequent i §El1§| eviction when the quarters were sealed because he j4.;4,) did not cooperate in removing his household goods. Eventually, ijna applicant Ihad Tm) remove .1,I424 his household goods in December, 2002 during this E 2 period, the respondents could not allot this house which is located in a very central and high cost location ii] Mumbai ix) other eligible
-.
officials and. although 'some' financial. loss [has .|-[ |.
I |:
II I II I 2 been passed on the applicant, the administrative I 2 E 2 E l E 2 2 2 costs of this indiscipline are likely much higher l '\- . [ and not quantifiable in terms of general morale I and the example he set for others who might tread the same path of flouting-lawful orders.
13. -On the' aspect of limitation, it is clear that the applicant received final orders on 2- ' * 24.04.2003 and if he had any grievance, he should' have pursued the matter immediately and not waited till April, 2012 and thereafter to submit +
2| his representationsr There is In; explanation by the applicant for the long delay in making appeals. In any case, as discussed above, Jhis :2 '.
""""""""" 'ii >\i 1:-==-1-"it-='$ I? E " we ff? ii I' E 13 OA.143/2017 '2 E E11 'I pleadings lack merits and he seems to have taken recourse to this Tribunal only after his attempts to harness local jpoliticians to Ibring unlawful i 'pressure ix; bear cni the nenagement failed 1:4:
-_:_=.;.;
finally. A
i
14. I hold therefore, that limitation under
Section 2l cxf the Administrative Tmibunals Act
_ I'
l985 "will strictly" apply ix; this case enui the
application deserves to be rejected. I' have 1;;mi.4;._1
discussed the merits' of the case. primarily
focussing cni the conduct cxf the applicant
i
including the grace, ignoring Rules, shown by
i
respondents and I am of the view that the
respondents should review his case, take. into
|
l
consideration his grave disobedience and his
resort to' pressure tactics in violation- of i
i
conduct rules _and then. ix) take appropriate
»|
disciplinary action against the applicant. In the
circumstances, the OA is dismissed with"the above
i
i
directions. HEM: legal costs cxf the respondents i
shall be borne by the applicant. l
1
i
-r\-|.
> _ . . -
'i
. .:_:;. _::_: ._.:::' \,:_.- _-L -_
-::- ~'< =:-.-<<---:\
A 2 -- >»' '>,.-" '=.--.-.1-7.1 -.-- =..\:_ -
§ K. A".,-_,.--.-' -
,1,_ ...\ -'\-..___ .;r ;.
._ x5;: " '"<1'=.5;.\:-:'
:- _,
€R- Vijaykuméax -2' .=F :3:-' 11-'
Amit/- A at 5 t '2
......................................................-- -- 1 1 *§.;>'.'§'<'~ ii I