Delhi High Court
N. Somarajan Gs 150747 K Supdt.Br.Ii vs Union Of India & Ors. on 1 March, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999IIAD(DELHI)299
Author: K. Ramamoorthy
Bench: K. Ramamoorthy
ORDER K. Ramamoorthy, J.
1.The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue:-
(i) A writ or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondent to maintain uniformity between the personnels of General Reserve Engineering Force and other Armed Forces which are covered under the provision of Army Act, 1950 in consonance with verdict of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
(ii) A writ or direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondents to pay to the petitioner the arrears of such special allowance like Bhutan Compensation Allowance to which he is entitled to due to his posting to Bhutan, Sikkim, and Meghalaya and to further post the petitioner to Bhutan in preference to his junior and pay him the Bhutan Compensation allowance as is admissible to other army personnels.
(iii) To issue a writ or direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioner interest at the rate of 18% on the delayed payment of the aforesaid allowances till the date of actual payment."
2. The point lies in a very narrow compass, and, therefore, the facts need not be noticed in great detail. The petitioner joined the General Reserve Engineer Force as a mason, and later on acquired diploma in Civil Engineering under the expenses met by the Government of India. Later on he was appointed as Superintendent BR Gd-II. His claim is that he was working in Bhutan for the period from 1.2.70 to 15.5.1976 and no allowance was paid to him. The petitioner is now working in Jammu & Kashmir.
3. The relief relating to maintaining uniformity between General Reserve Engineer Force and Armed Forces is not at all intelligible. The Government of India had issued circular with reference to applicability of the provisions of the Army Act and the Rules and CCS Rules in respect of the personnel working in General Reserve Engineer Force, and that is not disputed by the petitioner. The petitioner has claimed that while a few of the officers had been posted in Bhutan, he had not been selected and posted, which would enable him to earn Bhutan Compensation Allowance. It is pointed out in the counter-affidavit that the officers are posted in Bhutan on the basis of selection and the petitioner cannot have any grievance in this behalf.
4. The Government of India brought into force the rules relating to payment of Bhutan Compensation Allowance w.e.f.1.1.1986. The petitioner had served in Bhutan from 1972 to 1976, and, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim any compensatory allowance on the basis of the rules which had come into force only w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The petitioner cannot claim as a matter of right that he should be given compensatory allowance or be posted at Bhutan.
5. I have gone through the petition, counter and the rejoinder. I do not find any merit in the claim of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
6.There shall be no order as to costs.