Full Text
Translation output
$-21,23 &24 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C)1731/2013
INSP(M)HARVINDER SINGH Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal&Sandeep Bajaj,Adv.
W.P.(C)1731/2013
INSP(M)HARVINDER SINGH Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal&Sandeep Bajaj,Adv.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent
Through Mr.Saqib & Ms.Shipra Shukia,Adv.
Through Mr.Saqib & Ms.Shipra Shukia,Adv.
W.P.(C)1733/2013
SI(M)SIJRESH KUMAR Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal &Sandeep Bajaj,Adv.
SI(M)SIJRESH KUMAR Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal &Sandeep Bajaj,Adv.
VERSUS
Through Ms. Barkha Babbar, Adv.
I W.P.(C)1734/2013
SI(M))NAKCHHED PRASAD Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal& Sandeep Bajaj, Adv.
SI(M))NAKCHHED PRASAD Petitioner
Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal& Sandeep Bajaj, Adv.
VERSUS
Through Ms. Barkha Babbar,Adv.
CORAM: nON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAVINDIUV BHAT IION'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDERSIIAN KUMAR MISRA
18.03.2013 CMNo.3303/2013 in WPfCI No. I733/20I3
CMNo.3304/2013 in WPtClNo. 1734/2013 Allowed,subject tojust exceptions.
WPrnNo.I73I/2Q13. WPfC)No 1733/2013. WPfONo.1734/2013
I'he petitioner in these proceedings seeks appropriate directions for release of
House Rent Allowanee (HRA), Transport Allowance (TPT), and ail other admissible benefits, in accordance with the terms and conditions of his seivice. He relies upon various judgments and orders ofthe Court,including the order ofanother Division Bench
2013:DHC:7174-DB ofthis Court in W.P.(C)7582/2009 -Jayasankar M.N. v. UOland Ors.,m<i other cases.
Learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute that in accordance with the terms and conditions governing the service ofthe petitioner s appointment,he is entitled to such amounts on the basis ofAttachment Order being served.This Court also notices that on earlier occasions, when these allowances were denied, the respondents used to routinely take the position that the concerned officer was disentitled as he was released from Delhi. This Court, in W.P.(C) 7582/2009 (decided on 16.11.2009); W.P.(C)
20700/2005(decided on 17.05.2010)and in W.P.(C)8732/2010(decided on 24.12.2010), in identical circumstances had directed that the employees posted outside Delhi on attachment basis would be entitled to various benefits permissible in accordance with the' terms and conditions; identical directions are issued.
It is clarified thatthe petitioner shall be paid such benefits - HRA,TPT,and any other benefits as arc admissible to him in terms ofthe rules and regulations governing his services.
The Respondents arc directed to comply with the terms ofthe order within two weeks,d'lie Respondents are also directed to ensure and create a mechanism which would verify such claims made and pass appropriate orders in a time bound manner preferably within eight weeks after receiving representations to avoid future litigation. Such mechanism shall also be created after consideration, within eight weeksfrom today.
Order dasti.
S.ilAVINDRA BHAT,J
(y\_ ■ ^U/'lih-A>
SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA,J MARCH 18,2013 aj 2013:DHC:7174-DB
CMNo.3304/2013 in WPtClNo. 1734/2013 Allowed,subject tojust exceptions.
WPrnNo.I73I/2Q13. WPfC)No 1733/2013. WPfONo.1734/2013
I'he petitioner in these proceedings seeks appropriate directions for release of
House Rent Allowanee (HRA), Transport Allowance (TPT), and ail other admissible benefits, in accordance with the terms and conditions of his seivice. He relies upon various judgments and orders ofthe Court,including the order ofanother Division Bench
2013:DHC:7174-DB ofthis Court in W.P.(C)7582/2009 -Jayasankar M.N. v. UOland Ors.,m<i other cases.
Learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute that in accordance with the terms and conditions governing the service ofthe petitioner s appointment,he is entitled to such amounts on the basis ofAttachment Order being served.This Court also notices that on earlier occasions, when these allowances were denied, the respondents used to routinely take the position that the concerned officer was disentitled as he was released from Delhi. This Court, in W.P.(C) 7582/2009 (decided on 16.11.2009); W.P.(C)
20700/2005(decided on 17.05.2010)and in W.P.(C)8732/2010(decided on 24.12.2010), in identical circumstances had directed that the employees posted outside Delhi on attachment basis would be entitled to various benefits permissible in accordance with the' terms and conditions; identical directions are issued.
It is clarified thatthe petitioner shall be paid such benefits - HRA,TPT,and any other benefits as arc admissible to him in terms ofthe rules and regulations governing his services.
The Respondents arc directed to comply with the terms ofthe order within two weeks,d'lie Respondents are also directed to ensure and create a mechanism which would verify such claims made and pass appropriate orders in a time bound manner preferably within eight weeks after receiving representations to avoid future litigation. Such mechanism shall also be created after consideration, within eight weeksfrom today.
Order dasti.
S.ilAVINDRA BHAT,J
(y\_ ■ ^U/'lih-A>
SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA,J MARCH 18,2013 aj 2013:DHC:7174-DB
JUDGMENT