Writ Petition No. 7712 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
2024:BHC-AUG:16588-DB 22-WP-7712-2024.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7712 OF 2024 1. Sanjay s/o Rambhau Puri Age: 45 years, Occu. Service R/o. Govt. Ashram School Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Rajani Liladhar Ukey Age. 39 years, Occu. Service R/o. Govt Ashram School Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Pralhad s/o Venkati Chame Age 44 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt Ashram School Dudhad, Tq. Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded Namdev s/o Vitthal Kumbhar Age 55 years, Occu. Service R/o Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Pramod s/o Bhiku Rathod, Age: 45 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Jawarla, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Dilip s/o Shivajirao Munde Age. 46 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Mangesh s/o Vishwanath Chate Age: 38 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Umari, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 1 of 10 (( 2 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt 8. 9. Balaji s/o Shankarrao Munde Age: 45 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Sapna Janardhan Shatalwar Age. 41 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 10. Devyani Ankush Anbulkar Age. 45 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 11. Suvarna Shivaji Dhoke Age. 52 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 12. Dilip s/o Pralhad Kannake Age. 42 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 13. Mahadev s/o Kerba Gajbhare Age. 55 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 14. Sunil s/o Babulal Ade Age. 43 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 15. Maroti s/o Vitthal Kamble Age. 54 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Bodhadi, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 2 of 10 (( 3 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt 16. Nagorao s/o Tukaram More Age. 56 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Jaldhara, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 17. Sadashiv s/o Ramachandra Rathod Age. 56 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Tulashi, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. 18. Balu s/o Mahadu Suryatale Age. 45 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 19. Shivaji Baburao Ruddhe Age. 48 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Ekghari, Tq. Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded 20. Maroti s/o Naggonda Shirgire Age. 41 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Tulashi, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 21. Anil s/o Shesherao Suryavanshi Age. 44 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Jaldhara, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 22. Anand s/o Gangadharrao Karbhari Age. 39 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 23. Rajendra s/o Hanmant Ghulekar Age. 39 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Umari, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 3 of 10 (( 4 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt 24.
Legal Reasoning
Shrihari s/o Kishan Kagane Age. 44 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Bodhadi, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 25. Gajanan s/o Dipakrao Uttarwar Age. 43 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Mohapur, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 26. Prashant s/o Dnyandev Turak Age. 32 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sahastrakund Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 27. Santosh s/o Laxmanrao Patil Age. 38 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sahastrakund, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 28. 29. 30. 31. Padmin Nagorao Kendre Age. 36 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Bodhadi, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Shivaji s/o Tajerao Borkar Age. 42 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Tulashi, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Santosh s/o Navlaji Manavatkar Age. 39 years, Occu. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sarkhani, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded Jagnnath s/o Sambhaji Taktode Age. 52 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Dudhad, Tq. Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded 4 of 10 (( 5 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt 32. Kailash s/o Bhikaji Giri Age. 45 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Patoda, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded 33. Ganesh s/o Devrao Shelke Age. 51 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Govt. Ashram School, Sahastrakund, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. ...PETITIONERS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Finance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 The Commissioner Tribal Development Department, Adiwasi Vikas Bhawan, Old Bombay – Agra Road, Ground Floor, Gadkari Chowk, Nashik The Additional Commissioner Tribal Development Department, Amravati Division, Behind T.D. Hospital, Near Police Commissioner Office Camp, Amravati, Tq. & Dist. Amravati The Project Officer Integrated Tribal Development Project, Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded … RESPONDENTS .… Mr. E. S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. S. J. Salgare, AGP for the Respondents – State .… 5 of 10 (( 6 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per – Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.) :- DATE : 29.07.2024 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties. 2. The Petitioners have preferred this Petition with the grievance that as they are occupying Government quarters, the rent amount should not be deducted from their salaries and they should given the benefit of House Rent Allowance (H.R.A.). This prayer sounds a bit unusual. But this is the contention of the Petitioners which the learned Advocate must have repeated at least three times. 3. The Petitioners have put put forth prayer clauses (B), (C) and (D), as under:- “(B) By issuing writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in like nature, the Respondent No.4 may kindly be directed to give/grant the benefit of House rent allowance exemption to petitioners as per the G.R. dt. 06/08/2002 from the date of joining service in Kinwat Taluka in Nanded District and pay all the arrears of House rent allowance to petitioners. (C) By issuing writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in like nature, the Respondent No.4 6 of 10 (( 7 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt may kindly be directed to consider representation dt. 16/05/2024 made by the petitioners for House rent allowance exemption as per the Government G.R. dt. 06/08/2002 and for that, purpose this Hon’ble court may issue appropriate order to the respondent. (D) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition the respondents No.4 may kindly be directed to give/grant the benefit of House rent allowance exemption to petitioners as per G.R. dt. 06/08/2002.” 4. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that these Petitioners are working in a tribal area. They have been given Government accommodations as residences. Their H.R.A. is being deducted from their salary. The learned Advocate raises a question that when Government quarters are being granted to the Petitioners, the employer should not deduct the H.R.A. 5. We have perused the first Government Resolution dated 29.12.1992, more particularly, Clause-3, which reads as under. “[3] ,dkfRed vkfnoklh fodkl izdYi {ks=kr T;kaps eq[;ky; vkgs v’kk loZ vf/kdkÚ;kauk vkf.k deZpkÚ;kauk R;kaP;k eq[;ky;kP;k fBdk.kh jkfgys ikfgts- v’kk loZ vf/kdkjh vkf.k deZpkÚ;kauk rs izdYi {ks=kr useys tk.;kiwohZ T;k fBdk.kh gksrs R;k fBdk.kps ‘kkldh; fuoklLFkku R;kaP;k dqVaqfc;kauk jgk.;k o okij.;klkBh Bso.;kph eqHkk jkghy- R;klkBh R;kauk ‘kkldh; fu;ekuqlkj ?kjHkkMs |kos ykxsy- izdYik varxZr R;kaP;k use.kwdhP;k fBdk.kh R;kauk 7 of 10 (( 8 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt ‘kkldh; fuoklLFkku fnY;kl rs HkkMs ekQ jkghy o ‘kkldh; fuoklLFkku ulY;kl R;kauk ?kjHkkMs HkRrk fnyk tkbZy-” 6. Thereafter, we have perused Clause-2 of the Government Resolution dated 06.08.2022, which reads as under:- 2- jkT;krhy vkfnoklh @ u{kyxzLr Hkkxkr dk;Zjr vlysY;k vf/kdkjh @ deZpkÚ;kauk l|%fLFkrhr vuq’ks”k vlysY;k fofo/k loyrh [kkyhy fooj.kkrhy LraHk 2 izek.ks lq/kkfjr dj.;kpk fu.kZ; ‘kklukus ?ksryk vkgs%& izpfyr loyr lq/kkfjr loyr ¼v½ fuoklLFkku % ¼1½ ‘kklu fu.kZ;] vkfnoklh fodkl foHkkx] dz-vkLFkk&1093@iz-dz-245@dk-3] fnukad 29 fMlsacj] 1993 vUo;s laosnu’khy BjfoysY;k 11 ,dkfRed vkfnoklh fodkl izdYi {ks=kr dk;Zjr vlysY;k ‘kkldh; o ftYgk ifj”knsP;k deZpkÚ;kauk ßHkkMsekQ fuoklLFkkukphÞ lqfo/kk miyC/k jkghy- ek= gh lqfo/kk cnyhik= deZpkÚ;kaiqjrhp e;kZfnr vlsy- ¼2½ vkfnoklh {ks=kr fu;qDrh >kysY;k deZpkÚ;kl vkfnoklh {ks=kr fu;qDrh gks.;kiwohZP;k fBdk.kps fuoklLFkku dqVaqfc;kadjhrk 2 o”kkZi;Zur Lor%dMs rkC;kr Bsork ;sbZy- ek= R;klkBh fu;ekuqlkj HkkMs vnk djkos ykxsy- ¼1½ dkgh cny ukgh- ¼2½ vkfnoklh {ks=kr fu;qDrh gks.;kiwohZP;k fBdk.kps fuoklLFkku ‘kkldh; dqVaqfc;kadjhrk nksu o”kkZi;Zur rkC;kr Bso.;kph l/;kph loyr rhu o”ksZ fdaok deZpkjh vkfnoklh {ks=kr vlsi;Zurpk dkyko/kh ;kiSdh tks deh vlsy R;k dkyko/khi;Zar ok<fo.;kr ;koh- ek= deZpkÚ;kP;k ewG ‘kkldh; fu;qDrhP;k fBdk.kP;k HkkMs fuoklLFkkukdjhrk vkdkj.;kr ;kos vkf.k vkfnoklh {ks=krhy ‘kkldh; dsoG fuoklLFkkukdjhrk lsok’kqYd olwy dj.;kr ;kos- ;k izdkjs deZpkÚ;kl ,dk osGh tkLrhr tkLr 2 ‘kkldh; Lor%dMs jk[krk ;srhy- fuoklLFkku fu;fer 8 of 10 (( 9 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt 7. The learned AGP submits that there is no such Government Resolution which mandates that such employees should retain their Government accommodation as well as earn their H.R.A. He further submits that the reproduced portion of the Government Resolutions do not support the arguments of the learned Advocate for the Petitioners. 8. We find that the submissions of the Petitioners are wholly misconceived. The Government Resolutions clearly indicate that if a Government accommodation is allotted to them at the place of their work, it would be a rent-free accommodation. If they are occupying their own houses or have made their own residential arrangement i.e. a private accommodation, they would be entitled to the H.R.A. as is admissible. 9. The interpretation of the above reproduced Marathi portions by the learned Advocate for the Petitioners, cannot be sustained. It is his contention that once the Government accommodation is allotted to the Petitioners, the H.R.A. which is being paid, should not be deducted. In fact, the reproduced Clause-2 of the Government Resolution dated 06.08.2002, indicates that if a person is moved into the Adivasi area, the 9 of 10 (( 10 )) 22-WP-7712-2024.odt Government accommodation that he is occupying prior to shifting to the Adivasi area, can be retained for the family for three years, subject to payment of the regular rent that is payable for occupying a Government accommodation, after such candidate receives a Government accommodation at the place of his transfer. 10. It is well settled and the two above Government Resolutions also suggest that, if the Petitioners have been receiving H.R.A., the moment they occupy Government staff quarters which are rent-free, the payment of H.R.A. would stop. If the H.R.A. is reflected in the salary slip, the same will have to be deducted for occupying rent-free accommodation. As regards Clause-2 of the Government Resolution dated 06.08.2022, an earlier rent-free accommodation can be retained by the employee for three years, subject to payment of regular rent for the said accommodation and the service tax for the Government staff quarter in the Adivasi area. 11. In view of the above, this Petition is wholly misconceived and stands dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs. [ Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ] SMS [ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ] 10 of 10