ASHWANI MATHUR Vs. CHIEF OF THE AIR STAFF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the action of the respondents in imposing upon him the market rate damage rent for occupation of the residential accommodation of the respondents. The petitioner has alleged in the petition that he was allotted a Station Married Quarter No.206/8 on 1.6.99 and that as per the extant rules the petitioner was entitled to remain in the said quarter for a period of five years. It was also stated that as per the provisions of para 1725 of the Air Force Regulations, the petitioner is entitled to remain in the service quarter as long as he is posted with the present strength. As the petitioner was transferred/posted out to 35 wing, on 27.4.2001, he moved an application for retention of the station married quarter for the reason of posting in the modified field area, which was filed on 17.9.2001. It is alleged that not only the said request was not acceded to but instead the respondent No.2 issued a letter/notice dated 22.8.2002 to the petitioner whereby the petitioner was asked to vacate the station married quarter by 31.8.2002. It was also stated that the petitioner moved a writ petition in this court immediately after receipt of the said letter/notice, which was registered as W.P. No.5795/2002 wherein an order was passed by this court that the petitioner should not be dislocated from the quarter till the representation submitted by the petitioner is disposed of. It is also stated that the petitioner vacated the station married quarter on 8.8.2003. It is alleged that as the respondents served the petitioner with orders dated 3.3.2003, 22.2.2003 , 3.3.2003 and 10.3.2003 imposing the market rate damage rent on the petitioner w.e.f 14.5.2001 to 31.10.2002, therefore, the petitioner filed the present petition alleging that the aforesaid action imposing market rate damage rent upon the petitioner is in violation of the provisions of para 1725 of the air force regulations applicable to the Air Force.

(2.) The respondents, after appearance, have filed a detailed counter affidavit contending, inter alia, that the petitioner has been registered for allotment of station married quarter w.e.f 15.5.1996 and not from 1.6.99, as alleged in the petition. It is also stated therein that he was brought in Authorised Married Establishment with effect from the same day i.e. 15th May, 1996. It is further stated that as station married quarter was not available, which could be given to the petitioner w.e.f 15.5.96, he was given compensation in lieu of the quarter w.e.f 15.5.1996 at the rate of Rs.2100/- per month, which was, however, stopped when the petitioner was allotted station married quarter No.206/8 at Subrato Park on 10.1.90. It is also stated that since the petitioner was brought within the authorised married establishment with effect from 15.5.96, consequently he could remain in station married quarter for a period of five years as provided for under Para 29 ( a & c) of the Air Force Order No.06/95 dated 11.2.95 i.e upto 14.5.2001. The petitioner, however, continued to occupy the said station married quarter beyond the said period and accordingly a letter was issued to him on 22.8.2002 directing him to vacate the said quarter latest by 31.8.2002 failing which, it was stated that, market rate damage rent would be raised from the date of completion in authorised married establishment.

(3.) However, immediately after receipt of the aforesaid letter, the petitioner challenged the legality of the same in this court by filing a writ petition registered as CW 5795/2002. However, the said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 11.9.2002 directing the petitioner to file a representation to the competent allotting authority and to seek appropriate orders under law and also ordering that till then the petitioner should not be dislocated from the aforesaid quarter. The petitioner, however, did not make any representation within the time frame fixed by this court. The respondents accordingly wrote a letter dated 23.10.2002 to the petitioner reminding him of the order passed by this court, whereupon the petitioner made a representation on 21.3. 2003 for waiving off the market rent. The said representation was disposed of by the respondents holding that the petitioner could retain the station married quarter for a period of five years only and that his request was not tenable as per the rules. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition in this court.