RAMESH CHANDRA MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present application seeking the following relief:

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who was working as Head Clerk (Stores) under Mechanical Division, Bhubaneswar under opposite party no.3, had availed Government accommodation, being a Type-IV quarter. He was transferred to Rourkela Division on 11/6/2009. Though the petitioner was relieved on 12/6/2009, yet he joined at his new place of posting on 31/12/2009. The petitioner claims to have submitted a representation on 1/2/2020, enclosed as Annexure-3, to the opposite party no.2 for grant of permission to retain the quarter at Bhubaneswar till the date of his retirement, i.e. 31/1/2011 on payment of usual rent. By order dtd. 12/3/2010, enclosed as Annexure-4, the opposite party no.3 held the petitioner's occupation of the Government quarter at Bhubaneswar as unauthorized and he was asked to vacate the quarters within seven days of receipt of the letter, failing which action as deemed fit would be initiated against him. On 18/3/2010, an office order was issued, enclosed as Annexure-5, canceling the allotment of quarter in favour of the petitioner with effect from 12/7/2009 and by declaring his occupation as unauthorized beyond permissible period and of charging penal rent as per rule. Subsequently, by order under Annexure-6, the total outstanding rent (licence fee) calculated up to 30/4/2010 was shown as Rs.47,291.00, which was again revised by communication dtd. 3/11/2010 (Annexure-7) to Rs.49,881.00 . In the said communication it was stated that the total outstanding amount up to 31/1/2011 was Rs.99,509.00, out of which the total amount received up to 31/10/2010 being Rs.32,222.00, a total amount of Rs.17,406.00 was to be recovered from his salary and therefore, he was called upon to deposit the balance amount of Rs.49,881.00

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite parties no. 1 to 3 denying the averments of the Original Application. It is stated in the counter that the occupation of the quarter by the petitioner was declared unauthorized w.e.f. 12/7/2009 by the competent authority. It is further stated that the licence fee (rent) was calculated as per Finance Department Resolution dtd. 4/1/1999 read with Resolution dtd. 18/9/1998 of G.A. Department, as modified by order dtd. 1/11/2008. It is also stated that by another resolution of the Finance Department issued on 15/12/2010, the standard rent was revised to four times of the flat licence fee. As such, it was stated that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.