Madras High Court
The Chief Secretary vs R. Sudhakaran on 26 October, 2021
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. VIJAYAKUMAR
W.A.Nos. 585 & 586 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos. 5615 & 5616 of 2018
W.A.No.585 of 2021
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Puducherry,
No.1, Gourbert Avenue
Beach Road, Puducherry – 605 001.
2. The Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Government of Puducherry,
No.1, Gourbert Avenue
Beach Road, Puducherry – 605 001.
3. The Director General of Police,
Puducherry Police,
No.4, Dumas Street, Puducherry.
4. The Commandant,
India Reserve Battalion (IRBN),
PAP Complex, Gorimedu, D Nagar,
Puducherry. ...
Appellants
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
Vs.
1. R. Sudhakaran
2. D. Vijaykumar
3. P. Raguraman
4. R. Abdulla
5. The Secretary to Government,
Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, Central Secretariat,
New Delhi. ... Respondents
W.A.No.586 of 2018
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Puducherry,
No.1, Gourbert Avenue
Beach Road, Puducherry – 605 001.
2. The Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Government of Puducherry,
No.1, Gourbert Avenue
Beach Road, Puducherry – 605 001.
3. The Director General of Police,
Puducherry Police,
No.4, Dumas Street, Puducherry.
4. The Commandant,
India Reserve Battalion (IRBN),
PAP Complex, Gorimedu, D Nagar,
Puducherry. .... Appellants
2/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
...Vs...
1. S. Anandaraj
2. R. Rajesh
3. R. Rajasegaran
4. P. Pushparaj
5. R. Paneerselvan
6. T.Rajarajasozhan
7. G. Janarthanan
8. N. Prasath
9. V.Tamilmaran
10.G.Pushparaj
11.The Secretary to Government,
Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, Central Secretariat,
New Delhi. ... Respondents
Prayer in both Appeals: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letter
Patent Act, to set aside the impugned order dated 14.09.2017 made in
W.P.Nos. 9432 & 9433 of 2014 and allow the Writ Appeals.
For Appellants : Mr. R. Syed Mustafa
(in both W.A.'s) Special Government Pleader (Puducherry)
For Respondents : Ms. Dhakshayani Reddy
for Mr.P. Nethaji (R1 to R4 in W.A.No.585/2018
and R1 to R10 in W.A.No.586 of 2018)
3/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
Mr.Ramesh,
CGSSC (R5 in W.A.No.585/2018 and
R11 in W.A.No.586/2018)
*****
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J)
These Writ Appeals are directed against the order dated 14.09.2017
made in W.P.Nos. 9432 & 9433 of 2014.
2. The Respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.Nos.9432 and 9433 of 2014 are the
Appellants herein. The Respondents 1 to 4 and 1 to 10 in W.A.Nos.585 and
586 of 2018 respectively have filed the Writ Petitions seeking Mandamus to
direct the Appellants to pay fixed Travel Allowance with retrospective effect
from the date of their completion of basic training in India Reserve Battalion,
Home Department, Pondicherry from 17.04.2006.
3. The Writ Petitioners contended that they belong to India Reserve
Battalion, Puducherry and that they have successfully completed training on
16.04.2006 and their pay and allowances would be determined by the State
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
and it should be par with the personnel of State Armed Force. They also
claimed that that they are entitled for Permanent Travelling Allowance,
which is paid to the Police Personnels and others in the State Armed Force.
The Writ petitioners further contended that denial of the Permanent
Travelling Allowance to them is per se discriminatory, arbitrary,
unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Since
the writ petitioners and the other police personnel attached to the State
Armed Force are identically placed, there cannot be any difference in the
matter of payment of allowance.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants/Respondents 1 to
4 submitted before the learned Single Judge that the funds have to be
allotted by the Union of India and in the absence of sanction from the
Ministry of Home Affairs, the claim of the Writ Petitioners as such cannot
be granted by the Union Territory of Puducherry.
5. During the pendency of the Writ Petitions, The Secretary to
Government, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs has been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
impleaded as Fifth Respondent. The learned Additional Solicitor General of
India, who appeared for the Home Minsitry in the Writ Petitions, submitted
that the matters regarding pay and allowances, fall within the domain of the
Union Territory and impressed upon the Court that the Union Territory of
Puducherry is competent to take the call on behalf of the Union of India. In
view of the divergent stand taken by the Union Territory of Puducherry and
Ministry of Home Affairs, the learned Single Judge was pleased to pass an
order directing the Appellants herein to grant Permanent Travelling
Allowance as admissible, which is being paid to other police personnel
attached to State Armed Force, with effect from the date when the writ
petitioners became eligible for such allowance along with arrears to the writ
petitioners, who are entitled to such allowances, which is revised fom time to
time and Union Territory of Puducherry was directed to continue this
payment.
6. As against the said order, the present Appeals have been filed by
the Government of Puducherry on the sole ground that as per the
Supplementary Rule 22 i.e., applicable to the Writ Petitioners herein,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
competent authority under Rule 2 (6) is President of India or any authority
to which the power is delegated by or under these rules. Further, on
09.03.1993,the Ministry of Home Affairs have issued a communication to
the Government of Puducherry, stating that Ministry of Finance and
Government of India had agreed to the amendment of Appendix under
Supplementary Rule 2 (6).
7. The main contention of the learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the Appellants is that so far Supplementary Rule 22 or
supplementary Rule 2 (6) have not been amended and the communication
dated 09.03.1993 discloses only the agreement of the Ministry of Finance
(Department of Expenditure) and Government of India to carry out the
Amendment on a future date and so amendment has not been taken pace.
8. We have heard the learned Special Government Pleader
(Puducherry) appearing for the Appellants and the learned counsel for the
appearing for the Respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
9. There is no dispute to the fact that the liability to pay the amount
rests upon the Appellants herein, but the Appellants are attempting to
contend that unless there is specific orders of sanction from the Ministry of
Finance, Government of India, there would be Audit Objection for disbursal
of the Permanent Travelling Allowance to the Writ Petitioners. The learned
Special Government Pleader also cites that there was an Audit Objection, at
the time when the Travelling Allowance was paid to the local Police Force
and therefore the Appellants apprehend that similar Audit Objection would
arise in future, in case the Permanent Travelling Allowance is paid to the
Writ Petitioners herein.
10. We are not conviced by the said submissions. The liability to pay
the amount rests on the Appellants herein and the Ministry of Home Affairs
has already taken a specific stand that the Appellants viz.,Union Territory of
Puducherry is competent to take the call on behalf of the Union of India.
Further, before the learned Single Judge, no specific ground has been raised
with regard to amendment of S.R. 22 or S.R.2 (6) and the same is standing
in the way for disbursal of the Permanent Travelling Allowance to the Writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
petitioners. For the first time, such a ground has been raised in the Writ
Appeal. The learned Singe Judge in his order has also pointed out the
submissions of the Additional Solicitor General in paragraph No.6 of the
Impugned Order that Union Territory of Puducherry has not deputed any
officials to Government of India to have consultation in the matter with the
Ministry of Home Affairs. Before the learned Single Judge, the Additional
Solicitor General also referred to the Official Memorandum dated
14.08.2017, which clearly stated that the matter is pending consideration
with the Government of India.
11. In view of the stand taken by the Union Home Ministry, we find
no ground to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The
question of amendment to S.R.22 or S.R. 2(6) is within the domain of Union
Home Ministry and Ministry of Finance. Infact, the Ministry of Finance, in
principle has agreed to amend the said Rules and therefore the Writ
Petitioners cannot be deprived of their benefits.
12. In view of the above observations, we intend to pass the following
order:
(i) The order of the learned Single Judge directing the Appellants to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
grant Permanent Travelling Allowance as admissible which is being paid to
other police personnel attached to the State Armed Force, with effect from
the date when the Writ Petitioners became eligible for such allowance and
the same shall be paid along with arrears to the Writ Petitioners, who are
entitled to such allowances, which is revised from time to time is confirmed.
(ii)We expect the Appellants to follow the observations of the learned
Single Judge in paragraph 6 of the Impugned Order and co-ordinate with
the Union Ministry of Finance and sort out the issue at the earliest, in order
to bring out the amendment which was agreed in the year 1993 itself.
(iii)In case any amendment is brought in, the said amendment shall
be implemented with retrospective effect, so that the Respondents/Writ
Petitioners will be benefitted and will be treated on par with the police
Personnels of Union Territory of Puducherry.
With the above directions, this Appeal is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
[S.V.N., J.,] [R.V., J]
26.10.2021
Index: Yes/no
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
Internet: Yes/no
arr
To
The Secretary to Government,
Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, Central Secretariat,
New Delhi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
S. VAIDYANATHAN,J
and
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J
arr
W.A.Nos. 585 and 586 of 2018
26.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
