Original Application No. 259 of 2010. Case: N.K. Sharma Vs Union of India. Central Administrative Tribunal
|Original Application No. 259 of 2010
|For Appellant: Sharad Punj proxy counsel of S.K. Nagpal and For Respondents: S.K. Mishra, Advocate
|G.P. Singhal, Member (A)
|September 03, 2014
|Central Administrative Tribunal
G.P. Singhal, Member (A), (Jabalpur Bench)
This Original Application was earlier allowed by this Tribunal vide detailed order dated 18.4.2011 on the ground that the cases of the Applicants were similar to the one decided by this Tribunal in Original Application No. 753/2008 (Ajay Kumar Yadav & others Vs. Union of India and others) vide order dated 08.02.2011. However, the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Writ Petition No. 18999 of 2011(S), filed by the Union of India, has quashed the aforesaid order dated 18.4.2011 and remanded the matter back to this Tribunal to decide the same afresh, by observing that this Tribunal had passed a similar order dated 08.02.2011 which was set aside by another Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 25.4.2011 in Writ Petition No. 6263/2011(S). Therefore, this matter has again come up for consideration before this Tribunal.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the pleadings of the respective parties available on record.
The Applicants, who are husband and wife, are employed in the Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur. They have filed this Original Application against letter no.29/02/HRA/AVAS dated 08.01.2010 (Annexure A-1) by which request of applicant No. 1 for grant of House Rent Allowance had been rejected. The Applicant No. 1 was allotted Quarter No. 2553, Type II, Sector I in Vehicle Factory Estate and both the Applicants were living in that quarter. The Applicants took home loan from ICICI Home Finance and purchased flat No.L-3 Aman Apartments, Civil Lines, Jabalpur and vacated the aforesaid quarter on 27.12.2004. After vacation of the factory quarter, the Applicants requested Respondent No. 3 for grant of HRA, who vide his letters dated 17.7.2007 (Annexure A-6) and 08.10.2007 (Annexure A-6/1) rejected the request of the Applicants for grant of HRA. The reason given for rejection of the requests of the Applicants for grant of HRA is that the first Applicant had vacated the quarter allotted to him and HRA could be granted only when an employee submitted NAC (Non Availability Certificate).
The main claim of the Applicants for grant of HRA, is that the Ordnance Factory Board, Kolkata had issued circular dated 09.04.2003 (Annexure A-7) directing that HRA to such employees, who vacated factory quarters after constructing their own house after obtaining loans/HBA from the Government or from outside Government sponsored agencies be...
To continue readingRequest your trial