MAJOR ANIL KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the impugned orders dated May 27, 1996 and June 6, 1996 whereby the respondents have levied damage rent on the petitioner for retaining the defence pool accommodation for the period, December 16, 1995 to May 14, 1996.

(2.) The petitioner who was serving at New Delhi was transferred and posted at Srinagar in June, 1996. He reported for his duties at Srinagar on June 15, 1995. On June 16, 1995 he applied for separated family accommodation for his family which he had left behind in Delhi. On December 15, 1995 the petitioner applied for six months' extension for retaining the defence pool accommodation in Delhi. In January, 1996 the petitioner was allotted hired accommodation at NOIDA (UP). The petitioner, however, did not shift from the defence pool accommodation to the allotted accommodation at NOIDA till May 15, 1996. Consequently, he was asked to pay damage rent for the period December 16, 1995 to May 15, 1996 amounting to Rs. 42,126.00 Pursuant to the above said impugned orders the above said sum was deducted from his salary.

(3.) It appears to me that the action of the respondents in levying damage rent on the petitioner was not authorised by law. By communication of the Government of India dated February 7, 1991 to the Chief of the Army Staff certain concessions were given to officers, JCOs, NCOs, etc., who were transferred to Srinagar. According to the order contained in the said letter, an officer could retain the defence pool accommodation till such time he was posted in Srinagar. The relevant portion of the said letter reads as follows :-