High Court
Case Details
WP(C) 1383/2013 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. GOSWAMI
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. R. Borpujari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Ve rma, learned Standing Counsel, Health appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. I have also heard Mr. Sk. Noor Mohammad, learned State Counsel appearing for res pondent No. 4 as well as Mr. A.K. Barua, learned Standing Counsel, PWD appearing for respondent No. 5. The petitioner is a Grade - IV employee of the Assam Medical College and Hospita l at Dibrugarh and working as Female Attendant in Radiology Department. Her husb and, Sri Ghanakanta Borgohain was a Grade - III employee of the Assam Medical Co llege and Hospital and he was allotted Quarter No. E-14, Lane-C. He retired in t he month of April, 2011. On 03.08.2012, Quarter No. 41/3, situated at 4th Grade Colony of Assam Medical College and Hospital was allotted to the petitioner afte r the same was vacated by the earlier incumbent, Smti Mala Barman. The petitione r continued to occupy the quarter which was earlier allotted to her husband as t he retired employee did not vacate the quarter. The petitioner did not shift to the quarter which was allotted to her as per her entitlement and she submitted a representation to the authority contending that the quarter was not in good sha pe and not habitable. It is also stated that there is no electricity connection, no water facility, etc. in the said quarter. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of the order dated 03.08.2012 whereby Quarter No. 41/3 was allotted to her with a further prayer to allot her a suitable Grade - IV quarter. An Affidavit has been filed by the Principal-cum-Chief Superintendent of Assam M edical College and Hospital stating, amongst others, that on various pretexts, t he petitioner refused to shift to the quarter allotted to her and as she refused to move to the quarter allotted to her, on an application filed by one Smti Pok hila Barman, another Grade - IV employee, the quarter allotted to the petitioner was allotted to Smti Barman and accordingly, she is in occupation of the said q uarter. It is further stated that there is existing electricity connection, runn ing water and other facilities in the said quarter. Mr. R. Borpujari submits that it is only because the quarter was not in good con dition that the petitioner had not shifted to the quarter allotted to her and th erefore, the instant writ petition was filed for quashing the allotment given to her and for a direction to allot a suitable quarter to her. Referring to the ap plication submitted by Smti Pokhila Barman for allotment of Quarter No. 41/3 (An nexure - II of the Affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2), the learned counsel submits that it is evident that the quarter of the Grade - IV employees are not good condition as Smti Pokhila Barman had stated in her application that the qu arter earlier allotted to her was in a dilapidated condition. Ms. Verma submits that with regard to the quarter which was allotted to the writ petitioner, there was no complaint from anybody that it was not fit for occupat ion. It is also submitted by her that, may be, the quarter allotted to Smti Pokh ila Barman required some repairing and because of such condition of the quarter, Smti Pokhila Barman had made the application for allotment of another quarter. As the petitioner had refused to occupy the quarter which was allotted to her, t he authority took the decision to allot the quarter to Smti Pokhila Barman. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials on record. Materials on record demonstrate that the petitioner has been occupying the quart er which had been allotted to her husband, who has retired from service in the m onth of April, 2011. The quarter is meant for Grade - III employees and husband of the petitioner having retired, it is meant to be given to another Grade - III employee, who is in the queue. Letter dated 22.11.2012 written by the petitioner to the Principal-cum-Chief Sup erintendent goes to show that it was communicated to the Principal-cum-Chief Sup erintendent that due to her domestic problem, she was unable to occupy the allot ted quarter. As the petitioner refused to move to the new quarter allotted to he r, I am of the considered opinion that no wrong was committed by the authority i n allotting the quarter to Smti Pokhila Barman. It is also apparent from Annexur e - II of the affidavit-in-opposition that Smti Pokhila Barman was residing next to Quarter No. 41/3 and she had, by her application dated 12.11.2012, prayed fo r allotting the said quarter on the ground that the quarter in her occupation wa s not in good condition. The fact that another Grade - IV employee had specifica lly requested for allotment of Quarter No. 41/3 is a clear indication that the q uarter was not in the shape and condition that the petitioner had sought to proj ect. If that quarter was not fit for living, another Grade - IV employee would s urely have not prayed for allotment of the said quarter. It is also worth noting that the said quarter was allotted to the petitioner after the earlier incumben t, Smti Mala Barman, had vacated the same. She also apparently did not make any complaint regarding the quarter. As the quarter has already been allotted, and as the petitioner had sought for c ancellation of allotment of the quarter, first part of the prayer of the petitio ner need not be considered. From the affidavit of the Principal-cum-Chief Superintendent, it, however, by ne cessary implication, is clear that quarter occupied by Smti Pokhila Barman was n ot in good shape and that is why she had been given a different quarter on her p rayer. The materials on record do not disclose whether any measure has been take n to repair/renovate the quarter so that it becomes habitable. Though strictly not within the ambit of this writ petition, this Court also cons iders it appropriate to issue a direction to the respondent authorities to keep the quarters of Grade - IV employees in good condition and to provide facilities such as electricity, water etc. in such quarters.
Decision
It is also directed that authorities will also consider giving allotment of a qu arter to the petitioner, if quarter is available, notwithstanding earlier refusa l on the part of the petitioner. Such refusal will not be held against the petit ioner in the matter of allotment of quarter. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. The affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioner be placed on record.