Ravinder Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh
2012 Latest Caselaw 673 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                         Judgment pronounced on: 31.01.2012
+       W.P.(C) 623/2012
        RAVINDER KUMAR                                               ..... Petitioner
                     versus

        STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH                                    ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner          : Mr Arvind Kumar
For Respondent              : None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. (ORAL)

1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 26.05.2011 passed in OA No.

460/2011 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. The only

plea of the petitioner is that he should be given Travelling Allowance and Composite

Transfer Grant as per the Central Government. He has, however, been granted the

Transport Travelling Allowance under the Rules of Himachal Pradesh Government and in

so far as the Composite Transfer Grant is concerned, he has not been granted anything

inasmuch as the State of Himachal Pradesh does not have any Rules for grant of the same.

2. The Tribunal had placed reliance on the Government of Himachal Pradesh OM

dated 08.12.1998 dealing with the question of payment of Travelling Allowance to the

State Government employees in Himachal Pradesh. Paragraph 17 of the said OM reads

as under:-

"This OM shall also be applicable to members of All India Services and Central Services serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Himachal Pradesh"

3. Construing the said paragraph 17 of the said OM, the Tribunal came to the

following conclusion:-

"Admittedly, the Applicant belongs to Himachal Pradesh Cadre IPS of 1977 Batch. As per Para 17 of the Government of Himachal Pradesh OM dated 8.12.1998 dealing with the subject of payment of Travelling Allowance and daily allowances to State Government employees in Himachal Pradesh inter alia envisages that the provisions of the said OM would also be applicable to the Members of All India Services and Central Services serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Himachal Pradesh. Accordingly, I find that the Applicant who has been in the Himachal Pradesh Cadre and is not in the Central deputation during the period (July, 2004 to August, 2009). Thus, he would be governed by the TA Rules of the Himachal Pradesh Government. All India Service TA Rules as claimed by the Applicant would not be applicable in his case as he was not working in the Government of India nor he was on deputation to any of the Units of the Government of India. Thus, on this issue I come to the conclusion that only the Himachal Pradesh Government Rules governs the transfer TA and retirement TA."

4. It is an admitted position that the petitioner belonged to the Indian Police

Service of the 1997 Batch of Himachal Pradesh Cadre and he was serving with the

Government of Himachal Pradesh at the time of his compulsory retirement. It is,

therefore, clear that the rules applicable to him would be the rules prescribed by the

Government of Himachal Pradesh, particularly in view of paragraph 17 of this OM

dated 08.12.1998. In so far as the Composite Transfer Grant is concerned, it is an

admitted position that such a grant was not provided for by the Government of

Himachal Pradesh.

5. Consequently, we feel that the Tribunal has correctly come to the

conclusions that it did and we see no illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal.

The writ petition is dismissed.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

V.K.JAIN, J

JANUARY 31, 2012 BG