MANAKMOHATA Vs. STATE OF RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is one amongst large number of petitions which may not have at all been filed in the court, had the administrative authorities acted justly and fairly. It is indeed unfortunate that on account of insensitive attitude of the departmental authorities, petitioner, who is a member of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service, has been compelled to approach this court for redressal of his grievance.

(2.) The petitioner joined Rajasthan Judicial Service and after receiving his due promotions in the Rajasthan Judicial Service, he was promoted to the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service. As on the date of filing of the writ petition, he was drawing salary in pay scale No. 25 i.e. Rs. 4500-5700 with basic pay of Rs. 5250/- and was posted as Additional Registrar (Vigilance), Rajasthan High Court. Earlier he had joined at Jaipur on 13.6.89 as Additional Registrar (Writs), Rajasthan High Court Bench Jaipur. On his posting at Jaipur the petitioner applied for allotment of government accommodation in accordance with Rule 6 of the Rajasthan Civil Service (Allotment of Residential Accommodation) Rules. At the time of making of his application, his basic pay was Rs. 4650 and, therefore, he had made a claim for type 76-1. This he claimed in accordance with the Notification No. F. l(21)GA-II/85 dated 23.6.89. By letter dated 27.6.89 the government allotted BE-II-57 in Bajaj Nagar Apartments which is a transit accommodation and is given to a government servant as a stop-gap arrangement till a regular allotment of suitable house is made. For a period of over two years no suitable accommodation was allotted to the petitioner and, therefore, he served a notice for demand of justice dated 22.10.91. Since the notice of demand for justice also proved futile, petitioner filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and he has prayed for issue of a direction against the respondent to allot him a suitable accommodation in accordance with the Rules. In his petition the petitioner has claimed that he is entitled to type 76-1 accommodation in terms of Rule 6 of allotment rules. In terms of Rule 7 the respondent is required to maintain a class-wise waiting list and allotment has to be made in order to priority determined on the basis of joining and that even though the petitioner had applied as earliy as in the year 1989, suitable accommodation has not been made available to him whereas several other officers who have joined on a date later than the petitioner, have been allotted accommodation, and in this manner he has been subjected to discrimination.

(3.) In reply the respondent has admitted that the petitioner had applied for allotment of government accommodation in the year 1989 and that his name was included at serial No. 17 in the waiting list prepared in the month of June 1989. The respondent has also admitted that the petitioner was allotted a temporary government accommodation in Bajaj Nagar Apartments. It was further pleaded that the petitioner can get government accommodation only if Rajasthan High Court clarifies that petitioner has not got the residential accommodation from the houses which belong to Rajasthan High Court. It has also mentioned that S/Shri Gulam Hussain, O.R Gupta and G.S. Hora were given government accommodation by Rajasthan High Court and on their transfer the state government allotted accommodation to them out of turn under rules 8A and 10. Respondent has also pleaded that when the petitioner became entitled to Class-I government accommodation, he should have submitted a fresh application giving out details of his salary. It has also been pleaded that the petitioner has not been given government accommodation because he is entitled to get accommodation from the houses which belong to Rajasthan High Court and which are earmarked for the petitioner and other judicial officers.