Delhi High Court
Munna Lal vs Union Of India & Ors. on 24 August, 2015
Author: S.Ravindra Bhat
$~37
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on : 24.08.2015
+ W.P.(C) 7994/2015
MUNNA LAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Dr. Vijendra Mahndiayan and Ms.
Pallavi Awasthi, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Sh. Ajay Digpaul with Sh. Amit
Dogra, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA
MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT)
%
1. Issue notice. Sh. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC accepts notice.
2. All the petitioners are the employees of the Central Industrial Security
Force ("CISF"). Their claim in these proceedings is for release of House
Rent Allowance (HRA) benefits which according to them, they are
legitimately entitled to. The respondent CISF's position has been that since
the petitioners were provided barrack accommodation but were later
permitted to leave such premises, they are disentitled to HRA.
3. At the outset it is pointed out that identical issues have been dealt with
by previous orders of the Court. The latest in the series of orders is
W.P.(C)5407/2015 and connected cases decided on 27.05.2015. The Court
W.P.(C) No.7994/2015 Page 1
had then held - placing reliance upon the previous rulings, and the
judgments of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Dineshan K.K., 2008
(1) SCC 586, Director, Central Plantation Crop Research Institute v. M.
Purushothaman & Ors., 1995 Suppl. (4) SCC 633, and after considering
Rule 61 (3) of the CISF Rules, that the petitioners were justified in claiming
HRA benefits.
4. Having regard to the above position which has not been disputed by
the respondents, a direction is issued to the respondents that for the period or
periods for which the petitioners were granted outdoor residence permission,
they would be entitled to HRA, if no official accommodation were made
available. While making payment of HRA, the compensation paid under
Rule 61 (3) shall be appropriately adjusted. Payment shall be made to the
present petitioners by the end of October 2015. The affidavit duly indicating
the compliance shall be filed and the matter shall be listed for oversight in
this regard on 3rd November, 2015.
5. In order to prevent such cases for release of HRA from coming to this
Court needlessly, we direct that:
(1) The Director General, CISF shall ensure that benefits identical to
those claimed in these petitions are made available to all eligible
employees. A Circular to this effect shall be issued indicating the
appropriate format for application by the aggrieved employees.
Such Circular will be issued within two weeks, and a copy shall be
filed in this Court for record purposes, supported by an affidavit.
(2) Applications received under the Circular shall be processed in a
time-bound manner, at the latest within four weeks from the date
of such application.
W.P.(C) No.7994/2015 Page 2
(3) In case the court encounters any similar claims for release of HRA
after 12 weeks from today, the DG, CISF may be summoned to
attend the court proceedings.
6. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms.
Order dasti.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT
(JUDGE)
DEEPA SHARMA
(JUDGE)
AUGUST 24, 2015
sapna
W.P.(C) No.7994/2015 Page 3
