The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 1168 of 2022 -------- Goutam Kumar Sahu, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Baikunth Nath Sahu, Resident of Village+Post-Chholta, Purulia, P.S.-Barsole, Dist. East Singhbhum/Jharkhand Versus .......Petitioner 1. The State of Jharkhand; 2. Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O.-Dhruwa, P.S. Jagganathpur, Distt.-Ranchi; 3. Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O.-Dhruwa, P.S. Jagganathpur, Distt.-Ranchi; 4. Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, P.O. & P.S. Sakachi Town, District-Jamshedpur, Jharkhand; 5. Senior Superintendent of Police, P.O. & P.S. Sakachi Town, Jamshedpur, Dist. East Singhbhum. --------- .......Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner For the Resp.-State 06/Dated:-12.08.2024 --------- : Mr. Saurav Arun, Adv. : Mr. Rahul Saboo, G.P.-II --------- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on 12.09.1985 in the office of Superintendent of Police as Lower Division Clerk and was also given time bound promotion in 2006 and having cleared all departments and Accounts Examination, he was posted as Upper Division Clerk in the office of S.S.P. Jamshedpur. He further submits that in the year 1996, as per the order of S.P. Jamshedpur, HRA was given to petitioner and was paid till November 1996 and thereafter, it was stopped in terms of order of Deputy Commissioner, Jamshedpur. He further submits that the petitioner is residing in quarter of JUSCO (subsidiary of Tata Steel Ltd.), but in terms of order of D.C. Jamshedpur, S.S.P. Jamshedpur stopped making payment of HRA. He further submits that the petitioner is paying electricity charge, water charge, house rent on monthly basis to JUSCO, which is not a government company, neither a government undertaking, rather a private company owned and controlled by Tata Steel Ltd., hence the petitioner is entitled for HRA as per 1980 Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits the in W.P.(S) No.4953/2003, W.P.(S) No. 6903/2002, W.P.(S) No. 703/2009, W.P.(S) No. 5110/2014, W.P.(S) No. 253/2015 (Annexure-1 Series), the issue is no more res integra and the same has already been decided by this Court. He further submits that in terms of order dated 22.08.2006 passed in W.P.(S) No. 6903/2002, similarly situated employee, who too residing in JUSCO quarter, was paid the HRA after the order of the High Court and they are getting HRA. In support of his contention, he draws attention of this Court towards Annexure-3 Series, the Tax invoice which shows that the petitioner is paying electricity charge, water charge and house rent to JUSCO and Annexure-4 Series, the receipt of the money received for payment of rent and Municipal Corporation fees paid by the petitioner. He further draws attention of this Court towards memo No.5691 (Annexure-6) dated 21.08.2019, through which the S.S.P. Jamshedpur asked the petitioner to pay all bills to JUSCO and submit the same in office of S.S.P., otherwise action will be taken, which further certifies that the petitioner is residing in JUSCO quarter. Though, the petitioner has made representation (Annexure-7) by annexing all judgements of the Hon'ble High Court relating to payment of HRA; however, till date his grievance for non-payment of HRA has not been resolved. The petitioner has now retired on 31.10.2021 clearing all dues of JUSCO, as such the admitted HRA may be paid to him. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent relying upon the 2 counter affidavit, submits that the quarter which was given to him at Jamshedpur was allocated to the petitioner from police pool and as per Circular dated 05.05.1981, quarter provided by the company to the government will be treated as government quarter. Averments has also been made in para-13 and 14 of the counter affidavits that the petitioner has not vacated the quarter at Giridih. Relying upon aforesaid statements, learned counsel for the respondents submits that no interference is required with the impugned order. However, at this stage, it is pertinent to mention here that in para-10 of the counter affidavit, the respondents have admitted that the occupant is paying the rent directly. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the averments made in the respective affidavits, it appears that in reply to the counter affidavit, the petitioner has annexed letter dated 13.11.2021 (Annexure-10) and 18.12.2021 (Annexure-10/1), indicating that the S.S.P. Jamshedpur had asked the petitioner to clear all the dues of the JUSCO. From Annexure-12, it further transpires that the petitioner had paid the entire amount raised by JUSCO at Jamshedpur. It further transpires from paragraph-10 of the reply to the counter affidavit that the petitioner was not allotted government quarter at Giridih and nor taken HRA in Giridih. As a matter of fact, from Annexure-13 it would be evident from last pay certificate and no objection certificate that no quarter has been allocated at Giridih; nor any HRA has been given. On 31.08.2021, the petitioner was transferred to Jamshedpur from Giridih and he requested to allow him to stay in the quarter till retirement. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it appears form the reply that the claim of the petitioner is genuine, since the respondents have not responded to the reply to the counter affidavit; as such, interest of justice would be sufficed by quashing the order dated 13.11.2021 (Annexure-8), 3 whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of House Rent Allowance has been rejected by Senior Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur (respondent No.5). Accordingly, the order dated 13.11.2021, is hereby, quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to respondent No.5 to look into the matter and pass a fresh order with regard to the claim of the petitioner with respect to HRA, after giving proper opportunity to the petitioner for hearing in order to avoid any further confusion. 6. The petitioner is directed to approach the respondent No.5 with copy of this order and other relevant documents in order to settle the factual disputes. The respondent No.5, thereafter, shall pass an order of payment of HRA, which is admissible as per law. It goes without saying that similarly situated persons, who preferred the writ application in W.P. (S) No.1418 of 2017, are getting the HRA; as such the respondent No.5 is directed to look each and every aspect of the matter in order to come to a conclusion and pass an order of payment within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands
Decision
disposed of. vikas/- NAFR (Deepak Roshan, J.) 4