Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Dir Genl, Indian Council Of Agrl ... vs Registrar, Central Administrative ... on 26 July, 2024
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
****
WRIT PETITION No. 3536 of 2013
Between:
Indian Council of Agricultural Research,
Rep.by its Director General, New Delhi and another
.....PETITIONERS
AND
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Rep.by its Registrar, Hyderabad
and 9 others
.....RESPONDENTS
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 26.07.2024
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
&
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No
may be allowed to see the Judgments?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No
marked to Law Reporters/Journals
3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see the Yes/No
fair copy of the Judgment?
_______________________
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J
______________________
NYAPATHY VIJAY, J
RNT, J & VN, J
2 WP No. 3536 of 2013
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
&
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
+ WRIT PETITION No. 3536 of 2013
% 26.07.2024
Between:
Indian Council of Agricultural Research,
Rep.by its Director General, New Delhi and another
.....PETITIONERS
AND
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Rep.by its Registrar, Hyderabad
and 9 others
.....RESPONDENTS
! Counsel for the Petitioners : Ms. C. Vani Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents No.2 to 10 : Sri A. Rajendra Babu
< Gist :
> Head Note:
? Cases Referred:
AIR 1994 SC 2541
RNT, J & VN, J
3 WP No. 3536 of 2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
&
THE HON'BL SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION No. 3536 of 2013
JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) Heard Ms C. Vani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, through virtual mode, and Sri A. Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 10.
2. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-
"...to issue order or direction more particularly one in the nature of certiorari calling for the records in O.A.No.729 of 2009 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench and quash the order dated 18.01.2012 passed in the said O.A. ..."
3. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners submits that the respondents 2 to 10/applicants filed O.A.No.729 of 2009 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, feeling aggrieved from the note order dated 29.06.2009 and dated 07.03.2009 issued by the Directorate of Oil Palm Research the 2nd petitioner herein, under which they were held disentitled for the House Rent Allowance (H.R.A).
4. The applicants/respondents 2 to 10 were working in various capacities at the Directorate of Oil Palm Research, Pedavegi, West Godavari District under the control of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (in short 'ICAR'). A circular Fan.50/Quarters/2008-09, dated 22-01-2009 was issued directing all RNT, J & VN, J 4 WP No. 3536 of 2013 the staff members to apply for residential quarters in the prescribed form, before 02.02.2009, to enable the office to take necessary action in the matter, with the condition that the employees who did not apply for allotment of the residential quarters or who failed to occupy the allotted quarters within 15 days, might not be paid House Rent Allowance (in short 'H.R.A') and the quarter might be allotted to next person in the priority list. The 1st petitioner had issued a letter dated 14.01.2009 that H.R.A. could be paid from March, 2009, only if the employee applied for a quarter and had been denied government accommodation by the office due to non availability and that the employees who did not apply for allotment of the residential quarter or who failed to occupy the allotted quarters within 15 days might not be paid H.R.A.
5. The applicants contended that in view of the said circular the applicants were compelled to apply for the allotment of quarters as per their entitlement. While applying for quarter the applicants informed the 2 nd respondent that they are residing in their permanent houses purchased by taking loan and withdrawing the amounts from GPF after obtaining permission from the office of the respondents. The 2nd respondent without considering their requests had allotted the quarters as per their entitlement with the terms and conditions for allotment and informed that the normal licence fee of the residence shall be recovered from his/her salary bill from the date of occupation and he shall not be eligible for HRA and no request for change of residential accommodation will be entertained. 1st and 2nd applicants were allotted Type-V (No.2) quarters. They represented the matter to the 2nd respondent individually RNT, J & VN, J 5 WP No. 3536 of 2013 expressing their difficulties in occupying the quarters and further informed that the quarter allotted are not fit to occupy on various dates. 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 29.06.2009 informed the applicants that the request was examined and the same cannot be accepted by the competent authority as per ICAR Rules in vogue. There upon the applicants submitted representation on 29-06-2009 to the 2nd respondent informing that as per the ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and decisions of various benches of CAT government department cannot forcibly allot government quarter to an employee who does not apply for the same even if the quarters are vacant and government servants cannot be deprived of their HRA in case they do not occupy the quarters in view of the policy of the Government to encourage their own residences.
6. The applicants contended in O.A. that they could not be compelled to occupy the quarters and on account of their refusal to occupy, they could not be denied their H.R.A.
7. In O.A., the petitioners filed counter/reply statement inter-alia contending that the Government of India, Directorate of Estates had undertaken a review of the demand availability position of residential accommodation out of general pool to determine the accessibility of HRA to Central Government employees and issued instructions vide O.M.No.12034/1/2007-Pol.III, dated 14.11.2007 that the Government employees eligible for Government accommodation under the Rules would be paid HRA, only if, they applied for and had been denied government RNT, J & VN, J 6 WP No. 3536 of 2013 accommodation. In compliance of these guidelines, the Government of India/Directorate of Estates issued similar guidelines vide letter No.41(8)/2008- Per-IV, dated 14.01.2009 and in compliance, the Directorate of Oil Palm Research, Pedavegi vide circular No.50/Quarters/2008-09; dated 22.01.2009 invited applications from the eligible officers for allotment of residential quarters. It stopped payment of HRA to those who either did not apply for quarters or failed to occupy the quarters after being offered allotment by the Directorate. They had spent huge public money for constructing and maintaining the residential quarters for the benefit and welfare of the employees. If those remained unoccupied that would amount to loss of revenue to the organization. The HRA could not be claimed as a matter of right. It was a compensation granted in lieu of accommodation not provided to the employees by the organization which could not be saddled with the double liability i.e., to construct and maintain the quarters and then also to pay HRA to the employees.
8. The Tribunal disposed of O.A. vide order dated 18.01.2012 in favour of respondents in the following terms :
"15. In the circumstances we hold that the applicants who were offered quarters shall not be entitled for HRA in case they have not occupied the same. In case an officer who is allotted a quarter does not occupy it within 15 days he will forego HRA for that period. In the order of allotment itself, the authorities should indicate to whom the quarter will be allotted in case the allottee does not occupy within the prescribed period of 15 days so that there is no loss of revenue to the Government. If the second person also does not occupy the quarter within the time stipulated for him, it will be allotted to the third person RNT, J & VN, J 7 WP No. 3536 of 2013 in the seniority list and so on. If the list is exhausted, the cycle will be repeated."
9. The Tribunal took the view that the proceedings dated 11.02.2009 could not be interpreted to say that all the persons who refused to occupy the quarter one after the other shall not be entitled for HRA. In case, it was to be so interpreted that all officials who refused to occupy the quarter shall not be entitled for HRA, that would amount to refusing HRA for non occupation of the same house to several persons and that could not be the intention of the rule. Taking that view, the Tribunal issued directions as aforesaid.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the view taken by the Tribunal is not correct. She submits that instead of 15 days denial of HRA it should be, 'till the quarter remains vacant'. For the period the quarter remains vacant, the applicants would not be entitled for any HRA. She relied in Director C. P. Crops Research Institute v. M.Purushothaman1.
11. Sri A.Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 10 submits that the proceedings dated 11.02.2009 are very clear that the employees who do not apply for allotment of a residential quarter or who failed to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days, may not be paid H.R.A while the quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list. He submits that if the quarter remained vacant, for a period of 15 days, such employee would not be entitled for the HRA. It was thereafter, for the petitioners to offer to the next person in order of priority. One officer could be denied only for 15 days, 1 AIR 1994 SC 2541 RNT, J & VN, J 8 WP No. 3536 of 2013 HRA if, he failed to occupy inspite of allotment. The view taken by the Tribunal is correct. There is no illegality in the order of the Tribunal.
12. With respect to the judgment in M.Purushothaman (Supra), he submits that in the present case there are different proceedings dated 11.02.2009, covering the issue and not the same as in the case of M.Purushothaman (supra).
13. We have considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and perused the material on record.
14. The facts are not in issue. Only issue is whether the applicants are entitled for HRA after 15 days period of allotment, if they do not occupy the allotted quarters or till the quarter remains vacant.
15. HRA is a statutory right, and can be subjected to restrictions which are reasonable. The employee must have a right to get House Rent Allowance (HRA) as per existing Rules or Decisions of the Government of India which have binding force or a contract. It is not a matter of right, it is an compensatory allowance given by an employer to an employee towards the rental accommodation expenses of an employee when the Government was unable to provide residential accommodation suitable for the residence of it's employee.
16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Purushottaman (supra) observed that the Government or the organisation spends huge public funds for constructing quarters for their employees both for the convenience of the management as well as of the employees. The investment thus made in constructing and maintaining the quarters will be a waste if they are to lie RNT, J & VN, J 9 WP No. 3536 of 2013 unoccupied. The HRA is not a matter of right. It is in lieu of the accommodation not made available to the employees. This being the case, it follows that whenever the accommodation is offered the employees have either to have accepted it or forfeited the HRA. The management cannot be saddled with double liability, viz., to construct and maintain the quarters as well as to pay the HRA. The Hon'ble Apex Court further observed that the HRA would be covered by the definition of compensatory allowance. It is compensation in lieu of accommodation. This definition itself further makes it clear that compensatory allowance is not to be used as a source of profit. It was given only to compensate for the amenities which are not available or provided to the employee. The moment, therefore, the amenities are provided or offered, the employee should cease to be in receipt of the compensation which is given for want of it.
17. We are of the view that whether the respondents herein are entitled to the HRA in the facts of the present case or not and if not so entitled for what period, only for 15 days or till the accommodation offered to them remained unoccupied would depend on the then existing rules or procedure governing the subject.
18. The present petitioner Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), issued the Circular dated 22.01.2009 as under:
"NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE FOR OIL PALM PEDAVEGI - 534 450 (A.P) F.No.50/Quarters/2008-09: Dated 22nd January, 2009 CIRCULAR RNT, J & VN, J 10 WP No. 3536 of 2013 It is brought to the notice of all the scientists / officers / staff that some of the residential quarters are lying vacant as on 22.01.2009.
As per the Council‟s latest letter F.No.41(8)/200-Per.IV; dt.14.01.2009, House Rent Allowance (HRA) can be paid from March, 2009 only if the employees has applied for a quarter and has been denied government accommodation by the office due to non-availability.
Further as instructed by the Council in the above cited letter, employees who do not apply for allotment of a residential quarter or who fall to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days may not be paid HRA, while the quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list.
All the scientists / officers/ staff of this Centre (except those who are already occupying quarters) are, therefore, requested to apply for residential quarters in the prescribed proforma, which is enclosed herewith.
The duly filled in applications of the scientists / officers / staff should reach the office on or before 02.02.2009 to enable the office to take necessary action in the matter.
This is issued with the approval of the Director.
Sd/-Asst. Administrative Officer Encl: as above For distribution amongst all the scientists / officers / staff of this Centre;
Copy by fax to Scientist-in-Charge, NRCOP. RS., along with a copy of the above letter for similar action at Palode."
19. The relevant proceedings issued by the petitioners dated 11.02.2009 as put in the Order of the Tribunal are also as follows:
"It was observed that residential quarters in some of the institutes of ICAR have been lying vacant while payment of House Rent Allowance (HRA) is being made to officers eligible for allotment of the quarters lying vacant, in contravention of instructions which stipulate that HRA can be paid only if the employee has applied for and has been denied government accommodation. This amounts to loss of revenue and has been viewed seriously by ICAR. The Directors have been requested to immediately review the demand - availability position of residential quarters and at places where quarters remain vacant due to demand being less than the availability, following steps may be taken:
(1) Applications may be invited for allotment of quarters lying vacant latest by 15.2.2009.
RNT, J & VN, J 11 WP No. 3536 of 2013 (2) Allotment may be made as per the priority list drawn as per relevant instructions latest by 28.2.2009.
(3) Employees who do not apply for allotment of a residential quarter or who fail to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days may not be paid HRA while the quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list. (4) Payment of HRA for the month of March, 2009 may be made to only such employees who have applied for and have been denied government accommodation.
It may be ensured that there is no loss of revenue to ICAR on account of residential quarters remaining vacant."
20. The Letter No.41(8)/2008-Per.IV, dated 14.01.2009 also reads as under:
"INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, KRISHI BHAWAN : NEW DELHI No.41 (8)/2008-Per.IV Dated the 14th January, 2009 To The Directors / Project Directors / Project Coordinators / Zonal Coordinators / National Bureaus of ICAR Institutes.
Sub: Loss of revenue on account of residential quarters remaining vacant and irregular payment of HRA to officers eligible for allotment of quarters lying vacant - reg.
Sir, It has come to the notice of the ICAR that residential quarters in some of the institutes of ICAR have been lying vacant while payment of House Rent Allowance (HRA) is being made to officers eligible for allotment of the quarters lying vacant, in contravention of instructions which stipulate that HRA can be paid only if the employee has applied for and has been denied government accommodation. This amounts to loss of revenue and has been viewed seriously by ICAR. The Directors are requested to immediately review the demand - availability position of residential quarters and at places where quarters remain vacant due to demand being less than the availability, following steps may be taken:
1. Applications may be invited for allotment of quarters lying vacant latest by 15.2.2009.
RNT, J & VN, J 12 WP No. 3536 of 2013
2. Allotment may be made as per the priority list drawn as per relevant instructions latest by 28.2.2009.
3. Employees who do not apply for allotment of a residential quarter or who fail to occupy the allotted quarter with 15 days may not be paid HRA while quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list.
4. Payment of HRA for the month of March, 2009 may be made to only such employees who have applied for and have been denied govt. accommodation.
It may be ensured that there is no loss of revenue to ICAR on account of residential quarters remaining vacant.
Yours faithfully, Sd/- (A.K.Upadhyay) AS (D) and Secretary, ICAR."
21. The aforesaid letter dated 14.01.2009 in point No.3 provides that the employees who do not apply for allotment of a residential quarter or who fail to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days may not be paid HRA while the quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list. Point No.4 further provides that the payment of HRA for the month of March, 2009 may be made to only such employees who have applied for and have been denied government accommodation. So far as the employees who did not apply for allotment or failed to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days, they may not be paid HRA while the quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list. The present is a case where the respondents failed to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days. So, the allotment must have been made to the next person in the priority list.
22. The letter of ICAR F.No.41 (8)/2008-Per.IV, dated 07.05.2010 is also reproduced as under:
"INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, RNT, J & VN, J 13 WP No. 3536 of 2013 KRISHI BHAWAN : NEW DELHI - 110114 No.41 (8)/2008-Per.IV Dated the 7th May, 2010 To The Directors / Project Directors / Project Coordinators / Zonal Coordinators / National Bureaus of ICAR Institute.
Sub: Loss of revenue on account of residential quarters remaining vacant and irregular payment of HRA to officers eligible for allotment of quarters lying vacant - reg.
Sir, The issue of granting House Rent Allowance to those entitled persons who have refused to occupy allotted accommodation has been under consideration for some time now. In this regard, instructions/clarifications issued vide Council‟s letter dated 14.1.2009 refer. In continuation of the above, it is further clarified as follows:
(i) Every entitled person should apply for residential accommodation at his/her place of posting.
(ii) If accommodation is refused to him/her by the office, or till such time as the accommodation is allotted, the person concerned would be entitled to HRA.
(iii) Once the allotment is made, the person concerned is no longer entitled to HRA. If he/she refuses to accept the allotment, till such time as that accommodation is allotted and occupied by someone else, no HRA can be paid to him/her. In other words, the person who refuses official accommodation will not be entitled to HRA for the period during which that accommodation remains vacant and unoccupied.
(iv) Once the accommodation is allotted to some other entitled person and occupied by him/her, then naturally the person, who had refused the accommodation initially, is entitled to apply for accommodation once again;
and till such time as accommodation is again offered to him/her, he/she can draw HRA. In other words, in the above arrangement, every entitled employee of ICAR is either occupying government accommodation, or is in the waiting list, having a pending application for allotment, to qualify for HRD.
(v) The provision according to which those who do not accept an allotment are not eligible to apply for one year is dispensed with in such cases to avoid undue hardship to the concerned employees.
It is hoped that the above clarifies the position. In case of any doubts, either further clarification can be sought from Hqrs., or individual case can be referred with full facts for a decision.
RNT, J & VN, J 14 WP No. 3536 of 2013 This issues with the approval of the Secretary, DARE & DG, ICAR.
Yours faithfully, Sd/- (V.K.Sharma) Under Secretary (Per.IV).
Copy to:
1. Sr. PPS to DG, ICAR
2. PPS to Secretary, ICAR
3. PS to AS&FA, DARE/ICAR
4. DS (GAC), ICAR
5. PD, DIPA for ICAR website
6. CDN Section for giving index number (V.K.Sharma) Under Secretary (Per.IV).
23. The ICAR letter F.No.41 (8)/2008-Per.IV, dated 07.05.2010, Ex.P11, was issued in continuation of the letter dated 14.01.2009 and clarified that clarification No.(iii) is to this effect that once the allotment is made, the person concerned is no longer entitled to HRA. If he/she refuses to accept the allotment, till such time as that accommodation is allotted and occupied by someone else, no HRA can be paid to him/her. In other words, the person who refuses official accommodation will not be entitled to HRA for the period during which that accommodation remains vacant and unoccupied. This also clarifies that on refusal to accept the allotment, till such time as that accommodation is allotted and occupied by someone else, no HRA could be paid to him/her. Letter dated 14.01.2009 also clearly stated that on failure to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days, the quarter may be allotted to the next person in the priority list. When we read together the letters dated 14.01.2009 and 07.05.2010, it is clarified that the employee who failed to occupy the allotted quarter within 15 days, may not be paid HRA for 15 days and on expiry of such RNT, J & VN, J 15 WP No. 3536 of 2013 period, the quarter is to be allotted to the next person in the priority list. If the allotment was not made to the next person in the priority list for the delay on the part of the petitioners in making such allotment on expiry of 15 days, the person who has refused, it cannot be said that there would be non-payment of the HRA, beyond that period of 15 days, on the ground that on expiry of 15 days it was not offered to the next person in the priority list or that next person refused to occupy the same. If the next person was offered and also failed to occupy the same, the non-payment of HRA would relate to that next person. So, we are of the view after going through the above proceedings, that an employee can be denied HRA for a period of 15 days if there is allotment and he failed to occupy the same. The clarification in letter dated 07.05.2010, clause (iv) supports the view which we are taking inasmuch as it says that once the accommodation is allotted to some other entitled person and occupied by him/her, then naturally the person, who had refused the accommodation initially, is entitled to apply for accommodation once again; and till such time as accommodation is again offered to him/her, he/she can draw HRA. By the said clarification, the previous condition imposed in the letter dated 14.01.2009 that the provision according to which those who do not accept an allotment are not eligible to apply for one year is dispensed with to avoid undue hardship to the concerned employees.
24. In M. Purushottaman (supra), on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Office Memorandum dated 27.11.1965 of Government of India, Ministry of Finance which governed the position as on RNT, J & VN, J 16 WP No. 3536 of 2013 that date, on the grant of House Rent Allowance, was made subject to the conditions, which are reproduced as under:
"4. The grant of house rent allowance shall be subject to the following conditions:
(a)(i) To those government servants who are eligible for government accommodation, the allowances will be admissible only if they have applied for such accommodation in accordance with the prescribed procedure, if any, but have not been provided with it, in places where due to availability of surplus government accommodation, special orders are issued by the Ministry of Works and Housing from time to time making it obligatory for employees concerned to obtain and furnish „no accommodation‟ certificate in respect of government residential accommodation at their place of posting. In all other places no such certificate is necessary.
(ii) Government servants posted in localities where there is at present no residential accommodation in the general pool owned or requisitioned by the Central Government for allotment to them, need not apply for government residential accommodation in order to become eligible for house rent allowance. But where government quarters are available for the staff of specified departments or for specified categories of staff, the procedure for applying for accommodation will be regulated under the rules of allotment of the department concerned or of the local office of the Central Public Works Department, as the case may be.
(b)(i) The allowance shall not be admissible to those who occupy accommodation provided by Government or those to whom accommodation has been offered by Government but who have refused it. In the latter case, the allowance will not be admissible for the period for which a government servant is debarred from further allotment of government accommodation under the allotment rules applicable to him.
(ii) The house rent allowance drawn by a government servant, who accepts allotment of government accommodation, shall be stopped from the date of occupation, or from the eighth day after the date of allotment of government accommodation, whichever is earlier. In case of refusal of allotment of government accommodation, house rent allowance shall cease to be admissible from the date of allotment of government accommodation. In case of surrender of government accommodation, the house rent allowance, if otherwise admissible, will be payable from the date of such surrender."
25. The said Memorandum of 1965 in Paragraph 4(b)(i) laid down the consequences on refusal to accept the accommodation when offered. The condition provided that the allowance shall not be admissible to those who occupy accommodation provided by Government or those to whom RNT, J & VN, J 17 WP No. 3536 of 2013 accommodation had been offered by Government but who had refused it. In the latter case, the allowance would not be admissible for the period for which a government servant was debarred from further allotment of government accommodation under the allotment rules applicable to him. So the consequences provided was that HRA would not be granted for the period the government servant was debarred for further allotment after refusal to occupy the government accommodation offered, as per the rules of allotment, applicable to such employee.
26. In the present case, the condition is that on expiry of 15 days, if the employee fails to occupy the same, they it will be offered to the next person. Such offering is to be made by the petitioners. So, only up to that period, the HRA would not be payable. The present condition is not the same as was in Memorandum of 1965. The present condition is that after refusal or failure to occupy the accommodation, it will be offered to the next person and then the person who had refused initially is also entitled to apply for accommodation once again without any condition of waiting for one year and till such time as accommodation is again offered he would be entitled to draw HRA.
27. What we find is that so far as the present allotment is concerned and the payment of HRA, the same is governed by different procedure than as was involved in the case of M. Purushottaman (supra).
28. Again from reading of para-10 of M. Purushottaman (supra), it becomes evident that in the said case, there was a letter dated 13.08.1986 addressed by the Under Secretary of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research RNT, J & VN, J 18 WP No. 3536 of 2013 in which it was held that HRA should be denied to the employee who refused to take the allotment made or when offered to him till such time the quarter in question remained vacant for want of any other taker. In view thereof, it was directed that the organisation shall deduct the HRA from the salary of the employees therein only for the period the quarters which were offered to the employees remained vacant. In the present case, it is not argued before us that there was no other taker to whom it could be offered on failure of the respondents to occupy the offered accommodation and consequently, it could not be so offered and it remained vacant. Under the circumstances, the vacancy in the accommodation of the quarters offered to the respondents would be for a period of 15 days only. In the light of the judgment in the case of M. Purushottaman (supra) also, the respondents would not be entitled for HRA only for 15 days for which the accommodation quarters remained vacant for their failure to occupy the same after allotment and not beyond 15 days.
29. Thus, considered, we do not find any illegality in the order of the Tribunal in interpreting the proceedings dated 11.02.2009 that in case of an officer who is allotted a quarter does not occupy it within 15 days he will forego HRA for that period only and not beyond 15 days.
30. We do not find any illegality in the order of the Tribunal.
31. The Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
RNT, J & VN, J 19 WP No. 3536 of 2013 Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.
_______________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J _______________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 26.07.2024 Sab/Dsr Note:
LR copy to be marked B/o Dsr