KODALI VANI Vs. KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.12.2009 in O.A. No. 804 of 2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench whereby and where under the application filed by the Petitioner for a direction to Respondents not to withhold House Rent Allowance (HRA) on the basis of letter of allotment of an official quarters, duly declaring the said proceedings issued by the third Respondent as illegal and arbitrary, was dismissed.

(2.) The Petitioner is working as Lower Division Clerk in Kendriya Vidyalaya School (hereafter, the School) run by Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS), which is a fully financed Government of India Organization registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Her husband is working in the Office of the Assistant Commissioner, K V. Statedly she is staying in her own house, which is at a distance 3 KMs from the School since 1991. By a letter dated 27.8.2009, the third Respondent allotted one of the eleven quarters within the premises of the School to the Petitioner. In response thereto, the Petitioner sent a letter dated 31.8.2009 declining to accept the allotment of quarter on the ground that she is staying with her husband in their own house and she did not require the official quarters. In view of this, she was not paid HRA with effect from 01.9.2009, aggrieved which she filed the OA. She contended that she is staying in her own house since 1991, which was renovated by taking bank loan; as per the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (Allotment of Residence) Rules, 1998 (the Rules), unless she applies for quarters she cannot be compelled to accept the quarters which was unilaterally appointed by the third Respondent; Rule 11 of the Rules disentitling an employee from claiming HRA would have no application when the quarters is allotted against the wishes of an employee; and the action of the third Respondent in not cancelling the allotment is illegal and arbitrary.

(3.) The Assistant Commissioner, KVS, Secunderabad filed reply statement on behalf of the Respondents opposing the OA. Placing reliance on Director, Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kesaragod v. M. Purushothaman, 1994 AIR(SC) 2541, it was contended that even when the allotment is made without an application, in the event of refusal to accept the allotment, the employee would not be eligible for HRA. It was further submitted that as clarified by the KVS, by proceedings dated 30.7.2003 all the authorities should ensure that all the quarters at their disposal are allotted to the eligible members of staff and no HRA is allowed to such staff and that when the Petitioner refused to accept the allotment made in accordance with the Rules she would not be entitled to claim HRA.