PRAMOD KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned communication dated 21st April, 1995 (Annexure-P6) as well as for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to make ad hoc allotment of Type- 11 quarter in Sector-VII, R.K. Puram, New Delhi in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner is stated to be working in the High Court of Delhi w.e.f. 2nd January, 1995 in the pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200. It is further contended that the petitioner was offered appointment on 17th December, 1994 but as the Court was closed for winter vacations the petitioner was called to join duty w.e.f. 2nd January, 1995. Prior to the appointment of the petitioner, his father Shri Gopi Chand was in Government service and an allottee of Type-11 Government accommodation bearing House No. 541/VII, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. The petitioner was residing in the said premises alongwith his father for more than six months at the time of retirement of his father who retired on 28th February, 1994. The petitioner did not draw any House Rent Allowance after joining service as he continued to live in the premises with his father even after his retirement. In paragraph 4 of the petition reference is made to the Office Memorandum No. 12029(1 )74/POL. II dated 5th July, 1976 on the subject of ad hoc allotment in the name of near relations of the Government servants who retire from service which lays down that a request for ad hoc allotment from an eligible dependent could be considered in case the dependent gets an employment in an eligible office even after the retirement of the officer provided the appointment is secured within aperiod of ten months after the retirement of the officer. The aforesaid Memorandum is filed as Annexure-P3 to the writ petition and reads as follows :

(2.) The petitioner is stated to have made the request for ad hoc allotment on the above .basis which was declined vide order dated 21st April, 1995 which is filed as Annexure- P6 and reads as follows :

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner on the basis of the abovesaid Memorandum has contended that the petitioner is entitled for being granted ad hoc allotment in his name on the retirement of his father on 28th February, 1994. Respondent No. 2 has filed counter-affidavit wherein a plea is taken that the petitioner is not entitled to any accommodation on the basis of the Memorandum issued by the Government on 1st May, 1981. Paragraph VI of the counter-affidavit reads as follows :