Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sanjay Kumar Srivastava vs M/O Environment And Forests on 23 January, 2026
1
Item No. 30(C-VI)
O.A. No.531/2021
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No.531/2021
Order reserved on : 25.11.2025
Order pronounced on : 23.01.2026
Hon'ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)
Shri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, IFS
S/o Shri Brajendra Kumar Srivastava,
Aged about 60 years,
Retd. as Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
R/o: 9414/C-9, Vasant Kunj,
South West Delhi, Delhi-110 070.
...Applicant.
(By Advocate: Shri D.N. Singh )
Versus
Ministry of Environment Forests and
Climate Change & Others: Through
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of Environment Forests
and Climate Change,
Indira Paryavaran Bhawan,
Jor Bagh, Aliganj Road,
New Delhi-110 003.
2. The Secretary,
Ministry of Personnel,
Public Grievances and Pension,
Department of Personnel and Training,
North Block, New Delhi- 110 001.
3. The Secretary,
Department of Expenditure,
Ministry of Finance,
Government of India,
Digitally signed by
New Delhi-110 001.
RACHNA KAPOOR
RACHNA KAPOOR
Date: 2026.01.27
15:59:21+05'30'
2
Item No. 30(C-VI)
O.A. No.531/2021
4. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Manipur,
(A&E), Manipur,
Imphal-795001.
5. The Principal Accountant General,
(A & 3), AG Office, Manipur,
Imphal-795001.
...Respondents
(By Advocate : Shri R.S. Rana, Shri Pukhrambam
Ramesh, Ms. Anupama Ng)
Digitally signed by
RACHNA KAPOOR
RACHNA KAPOOR
Date: 2026.01.27
15:59:21+05'30'
3
Item No. 30(C-VI)
O.A. No.531/2021
ORDER
This is the second round of litigation initiated by the applicant. In an earlier round of litigation, the applicant filed OA No.1091/2020, seeking double HRA for the period he was posted at Manipur. The said OA was disposed of on 20.08.2020, with a direction to the respondents to decide the pending representation of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within three months. Since the respondents did not take any action therein, the applicant preferred a Contempt Petition No.61/2021 in OA No.1866/2020 alleging wilful disobedience of the order of this Tribunal dated 20.08.2020. In pursuance to the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the respondents have passed the impugned order dated 17.12.2020. Challenging the said order dated 17.12.2020, the applicant has filed the instant OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief(s) :-
"8.1 That this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be please to allow the present Original Application set-aside the impugned order dated 17.12.2020 and direct the respondents to grant the Double HRA to the RACHNA KAPOOR Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 applicant w.e.f 2014 till his retirement i.e 15:59:21+05'30' 30.4.2020 alongwith 12@ simple interest without any delay.4
Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 8.2 That this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the grant Double HRA in the light of the Office Memorandum dated 24.9.2003, Hon'ble High Court judgment dated 19.9.2007 in Shri R.S Mishra Versus Union of India & Others as well as Shri K.P Bhaskar Versus Navodaya Vidyalay Samiti & Others in O.A No. 2675/2013 decided by this Hon'ble Tribunal without any delay.
8.3 That any other or further relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal may be deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the applicant."
2. The brief factual matrix of the case is that the applicant, an IFS Officer of 1987 batch of Manipur Cadre, was on probation for two years at IGNFA, Dehradun and posted in IGNFA Dehradun. He was posted as Assistant Conservator of Forest under the Government of Manipur in the year 1989. Subsequently, he was promoted as Deputy Conservator of Forests in the year 1991, Project Director in the year 1992 and Divisional Forest Officer in the year 1995 until he was sent on deputation as Assistant Inspector General of Forest (AIGA), under the Department of Wasteland Development, Ministry Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 of Rural Development, Government of India, New 15:59:21+05'30' 5 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 Delhi on 17.01.1996. Thereafter, he worked under different establishments and finally he joined back to his parent cadre on repatriation as Deputy Conservator of Forests on 01.01.2014. After repatriation, the applicant was promoted as PCC Forests w.e.f. 27.01.2018 as OSD Manipur Bhawan, Guwahati and Shillong & OSD Forests, Imphal and remain posted there till his retirement i.e. upto 30.04.2020.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on 24.09.2003, the respondent No.3 issued an OM (Annexure-A/3), whereby it has been decided that the Govt. Servants who kept their family at the previous place of posting in hired or own accommodation on vacating the Govt. Accommodation which they were occupying, when they were transferred to NE Region including Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep Island (and also in Sikkim w.e.f. 01.08.1997), would be entitled to the benefit of additional HRA. The said OM dated 24.09.2003 reads as under :-
"Subject: Improvement in allowances and facilities for Central employees of the Central Government serving in the States Digitally signed by and Union Territories of North Eastern RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 Region, Andaman & Nicobar and 15:59:21+05'30' 6 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 Lakshadweep islands (and Sikkim also) - Clarification regarding.
The undersigned is directed to invite reference to this Ministry's OM No. 11016/1/E.II(B)/84 dt. 29.3.84 read with OM of even number dated 21.5.84 and the clarifications issued vide OM No. 11014/1/E.II(B)/84 dt. 28.5.86 in this regard and to say that references have been received in this Ministry regarding admissibility of the benefit of additional HRA to those Central Government employees who on their transfer to NE Region including Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep islands (and also in Sikkim we.f. 1.8.97) keep their families at the previous station of posting in hired or own accommodation after vacating the Government accommodation which they were occupying and have to vacate after transfer to NE region/A&N and Lakshadweep Islands/Sikkim. It has been decided that such officers would also be entitled to the benefit of the additional HRA as per the scheme subject to fulfillment of other conditions and the stipulation that they should have been in receipt of HRA at the last duty station would be relaxed in such cases."
4. With reference to the aforesaid OM, the applicant submitted his detailed representation dated 09.10.2017, requesting the respondent No.4 for grant of double HRA, who in turn, forwarded the same for further action vide their letter dated 31.10.2017. On 24.07.2018, respondent No.4 sent a communication Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 requesting the respondent No.2 to clarify whether the 15:59:21+05'30' 7 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 applicant is entitled to double HRA. The applicant sent an email on 27.05.2019, once again requesting the respondent No.4 for double HRA in response to which the respondent No.4 issued a letter dated 30.05.2019, stating that clarification in this regard is still pending with the Ministry of PG & Pensions and they are not able to grant any benefit in the absence of the same. Subsequently, applicant kept on making representations seeking the benefit of double HRA, however, the same was not granted to him for want of clarification from the concerned Ministry/Department. The applicant was superannuated on 30.04.2020, on attaining the age of superannuation.
5. In pursuance to the directions issued in OA No.1091/2020, the respondents passed the order dated 17.12.2020, rejecting the claim of the applicant. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that non grant of double HRA is illegal and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution as the AG Office Nagaland, a counterpart office of AG Office Imphal under CAG, has granted HRA in respect of some outsider officials of Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 Nagaland cadre, however, the same is denied to the 15:59:21+05'30' 8 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 applicant. He submitted that there cannot be different rules for the same set of officers by AG office.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that at first the respondents did not grant the double HRA to the applicant on the pretext of seeking clarification from the Government and thereafter impugned rejection order dated 17.12.2020 has been passed without obtaining relevant instructions from the Government and that the AG Manipur is not competent to issue the impugned order dated 17.12.2020. He further submitted that the similarly placed officers of Nagaland are being paid the double HRA, however, the same is denied to the applicant.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has availed LTC (Home Town) from Government of Manipur and also from Government of India, which shows that he is not belonging to Manipur. Secondly, allocating state cadre does not mean that a person becomes native of that cadre.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant drew attention Digitally signed by to Rule 3 of the All India Services (House Rent RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 Allowance) Rules, 1977, which says that the Members 15:59:21+05'30' 9 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 of the All India Service would be eligible to opt for the House Rent Allowance prescribed by the State Government or the House Rent Allowance prescribed by the Central Government whichever is more advantageous to him. Learned counsel for the applicant also drew strength from the OM dated 22.07.1998, specifically para 2 (x) thereof, wherein 5 th CPC has specifically mentioned „Officers of the All India Services‟ while dealing with additional HRA entitlement. Para 2 and clause (x) thereof reads as under :-
"2. The Fifth Central Pay Commission have made certain recommendations suggesting further improvements in the allowances and facilities admissible to the Central Government employees, including Officers of the All India Services, posted in the North-Eastern Region. They have further recommended that these may also be extended to the Central Government employees, including Officers of the All India Services, posted in Sikkim. The recommendations of the Commission have been considered by the Government and the President is now pleased to decide as follows :
2(x) House Rent Allowance for Employees in Occupation of Hired Private Accommodation The orders contained in this Ministry's Digitally signed by O.M. No 11016/1/E.II(B)/84 dated March RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 29 1984, and extended in this Ministry's O.M. No. 20014/16/86-E.IV/E II(B) dated 15:59:21+05'30' 10 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 December 1, 1988, shall continue to be applicable."
9. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the following judicial pronouncements :-
(i) Judgment of Hon‟ble High Court in R.S.Mishra Vs. Ranglal Jamuda & Ors. decided on 09.09.2009.
(ii) The decision of Constitution Bench of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court dated 25.07.1997 in the K.C. Sharma and Others Versus Union of India & Others 1998(1) SLJ SC 54.
(iii) Union of India & Anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal AIRONLINE 2013 SC 479
10. Pursuant to notice, the respondents have appeared and detailed reply has been filed only on behalf of respondent No.5, opposing the OA However, learned counsel for respondents No.1to3 submits that they will adopt the reply filed by respondent No.5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicant himself claimed that he was posted in Digitally signed by Dehradun, IGNFA for two years, so he was posted in RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 North Eastern Region (NER) from outside and it was 15:59:21+05'30' 11 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 not his initial posting in the NER. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the case of the applicant is the first and the only case of AIS Officer claiming double HRA on the basis of the OM dated 24.09.2003. In order to get the clarity, the respondents referred the matter to Ministry of PG and Pensions for clarification vide letter dated 24.07.2018 followed by reminders vide letters dated 21.05.2019 and 20.03.2020, however, the reply is still awaited.
11. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that claim of double HRA by the applicant on the basis of OM dated 24.09.2003 is applicable to only Central Government employees and not to the All India Service Officers who are governed by the IFS Pay Rules, 2016 and his claim, if any, for double HRA was for a period of his probationary training in IGNFA, Dehradun, which was beyond the scope of the provisions of the aforesaid OM dated 24.09.2003, so his case was referred for clarification to Ministry of PG & Pensions by the AG Office.
12. With respect to the contention of the applicant Digitally signed by that in Nagaland, some outsider officials have been RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 allowed double HRA, it is submitted that each AG 15:59:21+05'30' 12 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 office is independent and is dealing with cases of officers under its own jurisdiction in accordance with the relevant rules/orders issued by Govt. Of India. As and when the clarifications are required on specific matters, as in the present case, the respondents have to seek from the GOI the necessary guidance to comply with the existing regulations/instructions /orders of the concerned Nodal Department only and in the instant case, the matter was referred to the Govt. of India at the initial stage since 24.07.2018. The order dated 17.12.2020 not acceding to the request of the applicant has been passed after due examination of the representations of the applicant claiming HRA on the basis of OM dated 24.09.2003.
13. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the facts of the case relied upon by the applicant in R.S. Mishra are not identical to the present OA as the petitioner in that case was a Central Government employee and had fulfilled the provisions of the OM dated 24.09.2003. Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 15:59:21+05'30' 13 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021
14. On 22.08.2025, the Tribunal passed the following order :-
"6. ....one more last opportunity is given to the Respondent No.2 to file their counter reply before next date of hearing, failing which Respondent No.2, i.e. Secretary, DoP&T may be required to appear in person before this Tribunal and assist in the matter for proper adjudication."
15. In pursuance to the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the respondent No.2 has filed the additional affidavit stating as under :-
4. That the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Manipur, vide its letter dated 12.10.2020, had sought clarification regarding admissibility of double HRA to AIS officers serving in North Eastern Region under the existing rules and regulations. The matter was examined in light of the relevant rules and Office Memorandums issued from time to time i.e. OM No.11016/1/E.II(B)/84 dated 29.03.1984(ANNEXURE-I), OM No.20014/16/86-E.IV/E.II(B) dated 01.12.1988 (ANNEXURE-II), OM No.11(2)/97-
E.II(B) dated 22.07.1998 (ΑΝNEXURE-III), OM No.14017/3/97-AIS-II dated 05.10.1998 (ΑΝNEXURE-IV), OM No.2(38)/2001-E.II(B) dated 24.09.2003 (ΑΝNEXURE-V). OM No.2(19)/E.II(B)/2008 dated 02.01.2009 (ANNEXURE-VI) and OM No.28/1/2017-E.II(B) dated 19.07.2017(ANNEXURE-VII). The Office Memorandum issued by the Department of Personnel and Training on 05.10.1998 provides that :
"All the provisions and extant rules regarding admissibility of double HRA to Central Government employees posted in North Eastern States issued by Department of Expenditure vide Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 15:59:21+05'30' their OM No.11(2)/97-E II(B) dated July 22, 1998 is equally applicable mutatis 14 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021 mutandis to AIS officers, serving in the North East."
5. Based on the OMs issued from time to time, the following clarification was given to the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Manipur vide this 01.09.2021 (ANNEXURE-VIII):
"The OMs dated 2nd January, 2009 and 19th July, 2017 have been issued by the D/o Expenditure with reference to its letter dated 22nd July, 1998, which was extended mutatis mutandis to the AIS officers vide this Department letter No.14017/3/97- AIS-II dated 5th October, 1998. Accordingly, claims of officer seeking HRA for the period of residence in his own house can be considered in light of the extant rules.
Hence, the provision of double HRA allowed for Central Government employees/Civilian Central Government employees posted in North Eastern Region is also applicable in the case of the Petitioner, Sh. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava who was an AIS officer at the referenced point of time subject to fulfilment of other conditions and stipulations."
16. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
17. It is understood that the issue inter alia involved in the present OA has been duly addressed by the respondent No.2 i.e. DOP&T in their counter affidavit filed on 24.09.2025 and the response of the DOP&T Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.27 15:59:21+05'30' in this regard is self explanatory. 15 Item No. 30(C-VI) O.A. No.531/2021
18. Keeping in view the stand of the DOP&T, i.e. the provision of Double HRA allowed for Central Government employees/Civilian Central Government employees posted in N.E. Region is also applicable in case of the applicant who was AIS officer at the relevant point of time subject to fulfilment of other conditions and stipulations, the impugned order dated 17.12.2020 passed by the office of the Principal Account General (A&E) Manipur, Imphal is set aside as the same is against the stand of the DOP&T.
19. In view of the above, the OA is disposed of with the directions to the respondents to take appropriate decision within a period of six weeks on the claim of applicant for payment of double HRA, in accordance with the stand taken by the DOPT and extant/policy of the Government in this regard.
20. All pending MAs, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
RACHNA KAPOOR Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR (Rajveer Singh Verma) Member (J) Date: 2026.01.27 15:59:21+05'30' 'rk'