Deep Narayan Singh vs Union Of India & Ors

Om Prakash-VII, Member (J)

The applicant has filed the present O.A. with the prayer to quash the impugned notices dated 6.9.2017 and 18.9.2017 (Annexure A-1) issued by the respondents No. 6 and 7 respectively and for direction to process the case of the applicant for retention of railway quarter at Allahabad on medical ground under guidelines issued by the Ministry of Railway, Railway Board vide letter dated 16.4.2004. It is also prayed that direction may be given to the respondent No. 5 to refund the recovered amount of penal/damage rent from the salary of the applicant with interest @ 12% per annum.

The brief facts of the case are that applicant was posted as Junior Clerk in the office of Senior Divisional Security Commissioner/ RPF, North Central Railway, Allahabad. Vide order dated 30.11.2015, he was transferred from Allahabad to Jhansi. Applicant joined the duty at the transferred place i.e. Jhansi Division. Applicant moved representation for retention of Railway quarter. Initially respondents have granted permission for retention of railway quarter from 1.12.2015 to 31.3.2016 (total four months). Thereafter, respondents have started recovery of penel/damage rent from the salary of the applicant without any show cause notice. It is further stated that neither the applicant was receiving House rent allowance nor he was allotted railway accommodation at transferred place. Applicant made several representations for retention of railway quarter at Allahabad on medical ground and mid session of school of his ward but the authority rejected the request of the applicant and issued notices, instructed the applicant to vacate the railway quarter at Allahabad otherwise departmental proceedings will be initiated.

Learned counsel for respondents have filed counter reply stating therein that applicant while working as Clerk in Allahabad was allotted a Govt. accommodation No. 439 G, Railway Colony, Lalit Nagar, Allahabad and he was transferred to Jhansi Division but on his request, he was permitted for retention of Govt. quarter from 1.12.2015 to 31.1.2016 under Master Circular No. 49. Vide letter dated 31.5.2016, further permission for retention of Govt. accommodation from 1.2.2016 to 31.3.2016 + 15 days was granted to the applicant and it was informed that no further extension will be given and after 16.4.2016 , the allotment will be treated as cancelled and thereafter damage rent will be charged. It is further submitted that it is clearly mentioned in Rule 8.01 B of Master Circular 49 that the resident be kept by the transferred employee or his ward, when they are under treatment of doctor of Railway hospital but the applicant never did so and not submitted such medical evidence. It is further stated that representation of the applicant has already been disposed off vide letter dated 11.7.2017. It is further stated that Rule in this regard clearly says that “Service Illness- in such cases means illness of the nature of acute debilitating disease, which requires hospitalization and /or constant medical supervision to the railway employee or any member of his/her family which must be duly certified by the concerned Chief Medical Director of the Railway recommending such retention of railway accommodation.”

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that after transfer of the applicant, he requested the respondents for retention of govt. accommodation on medical ground of his wife and study of his ward. To substantiate his claim, he had annexed pathology test reports of railway hospitals and medical prescriptions of some private hospitals. Along with Rejoinder reply, he has annexed medical certificate dated 28.10.2017 of Railway doctor. It is further argued that without considering the medical ground of the applicant, respondents issued impugned notice for vacating the quarter within 15 days which is against the Master Circular No. 49. He further argued that relaxation of power for retention of govt. accommodations exists with the Railway Board and respondents cannot cancel his request for retention of railway quarter on medical ground without sending the request before the Board. He has argued that in the full Board Meeting held on 11.7.2002, it was considered necessary to empower the Board to make relaxation to cover a group of such individuals affected by extreme hardship on medical ground. On the decision of the decision taken by the Board, it has been decided to modify the instructions dated 18.7.2000, as under:-

“Notwithstanding anything contained in the general orders, guidelines etc. in regard to allotment/retention and charging of rent in respect of Railway accommodation in Railway Board’s Master Circular No. 49 (No. E(G)92 QRI-20- Master Circular) dated 19.1.1993 as further amended from time to time, the Ministry of Railways (Railway Board) for reasons to be recorded in writing, may make reasonable relaxations in public interest in all or any of the existing provisions therein regarding allotment/ retention of railway accommodation and charging of rent therefore, for a class/ group of employees.

Every proposal meriting relaxation as provided in para (2) above, shall be considered by the full Board in terms of laid down policy guidelines/ instructions regulating the subject matter, vis-à-vis the operational and administrative needs of the Railways and decisions taken by the Board, thereon, shall be communicated by issue of orders.

Notwithstanding anything contained in paras above preceding, Board may also permit retention of railway accommodation as a special case in the case of individuals constituting a class on medical grounds which necessitate the retention of railway accommodation beyond the permissible period.”

Learned counsel for respondents argued that retention of railway accommodation on medical ground can be permitted only on production of medical certificate of Railway hospital doctors but applicant has failed to produce the same. It is further argued that permission for retention of railway quarter was granted to the applicant as per rules but beyond the limitation period of retention of govt. accommodation, permission cannot be granted and damage rent will be charged. He further argued that para 8.2 (a) of the master circular provides that a Railway employee who has all India transfer liability or, in the exigencies of public service, is posted on transfer to the N.E. Railway excluding Katihar Division, will be permitted to retain railway accommodation allotted to him/her at the last station of his /her posting, on payment of normal rent/single flat rate of licence fee/ rent for the first two months and thereafter at 1/1/2 times of the normal rent/ flat rate of licence fee/ rent. However, officers posted subsequently to Katihar Division will continue to get this benefit on personal basis.

I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the entire record.

From perusal of record, it is evident that on transfer from Allahabad to Jhansi, applicant is not getting the HRA at the transferred place nor he has been allotted any govt. accommodation at new place of posting. He has been permitted to retain the govt. accommodation lastly from 1.2.2016 to 31.3.2016 + 15 days. Thereafter, respondents have started recovering penal rent/damage rent from the applicant. Vide application dated 14.6.2017, 16.6.2017, applicant has requested for retention of railway accommodation till 31.3.2018 on charging the double rent but no action has been taken by the respondents. Vide application dated 19.8.2017, 28.8.2017, 19.9.2017, applicant had requested to forward his request for retention of railway accommodation to Railway Board for necessary orders as per rules, but without forwarding his applications, respondents issued notices dated 6.9.2017 and 18.9.2017 for vacating the govt. accommodation within 15 days. It is clear that in full Board’s Meeting held on 11.7.2002, powers was given to the Board to make relaxation to cover a group of such individuals affected by extreme hardship on medical ground and on the decision taken by the Board, it has been decided to modify the instructions dated 18.7.2000 and empowered the Railway Board to make reasonable relaxations in public interest in all or any of the existing provisions therein regarding allotment/ retention of railway accommodation and charging of rent therefore, for a class/ group of employees. Every proposal meriting relaxation as provided in para (2) above, shall be considered by the full Board in terms of laid down policy guidelines/ instructions regulating the subject matter, vis-à-vis the operational and administrative needs of the Railways and decisions taken by the Board, thereon, shall be communicated by issue of orders. Notwithstanding anything contained in paras above preceding, Board may also permit retention of railway accommodation as a special case in the case of individuals constituting a class on medical grounds which necessitate the retention of railway accommodation beyond the permissible period. In para 3 (iii) of Railway Board Circular dated 16.3.2014 it is clearly mentioned that “The retention of Railway accommodation beyond the permissible period on medical grounds may be granted by the competent authority for a period not exceeding one year in any case.” But in the instant case, applicant was transferred on 13.11.2015. He was permitted to retain the govt. accommodation lastly from 1.2.2016 to 31.3.2016 + 15 days i.e. upto 15.4.2016 vide letter dated 20.3.2016 but till date applicant has not vacated the govt. accommodation and applicant again requested for retention of govt. accommodation till 31.3.2018 which has not been replied by the respondents. Rule clearly provides that permission for retention of govt. accommodation on medical ground cannot be exceeded one year in any case. Therefore, after that penal/ damage rent is liable to be imposed upon the applicant.

Accordingly, the O.A. is partly allowed. Retention period permissible under law i.e. 1 year is considered to be regularized for the aforesaid railway accommodation in the name of the applicant. Period exceeding one year shall be subject to the payment of damage/penal rent till today or when the aforesaid accommodation is vacated by the applicant.

There shall be no order as to costs.