Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Dr. Kailash Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 68045 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 4994 (27 October 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.68045 of 2005

Dr. Kailash Singh


State of U.P. & Ors.

Hon. Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon. Bharati Sapru, J.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 05.07.2005 and 10.10.2005 (Annex.2 and 3) passed by the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, i.e. respondent no.3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner who was working as Senior Child Specialist, District Hospital, Ghazipur and was allotted House No. B-15 District Hospital Compounded Colony, Ghazipur, retired on 31.07.2005 from service. His school going children are residing in the aforesaid accommodation with him. The respondent-department are compelling the petitioner to vacate the said premises as the said house has been allotted to respondent no.4 vide order dated 05.07.2005. The District Magistrate, Ghazipur, on the representation made by respondent no.4, vide order dated 10.10.2005 directed the Chief Medical Officer, Ghazipur take possession of the aforesaid government accommodation till 31.10.2005 and handover the possession of the same to respondent no.4. He further submitted that the respondent no.2 is compelling the petitioner to vacate the official residence. He, therefore, prayed that he should be permitted to reside in the aforesaid accommodation for sometimes, as construction of his house is going on and is likely to be completed within four five months.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that as per the provisions contained in the Fundamental Rules, a retired government servant, after the retirement, is entitled to retain the accommodation for a period of one month on usual rent and, subsequently for a period of three months on standard rent. As three months' period is likely to complete on 30th October, 2005, therefore, he is bound to pay the rent as per aforesaid determination.

We have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The question of paying the penal rent by the employee was also considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Grid Corporation of Orissa Vs. Rasananda Das, 2003 AIR SCW 5390, holding that an employee is bound to pay the rent/penal rent in accordance with the Rules applicable for overstaying in the accommodation after transfer/retirement. Thus, the petitioner cannot take the plea that he is not bound to pay the penal rent.

In view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, we dispose of this writ petition directing the petitioner to pay the usual rent for a period of one month, standard rent for a period of three months and penal rent for the remaining period and vacate the said accommodation at the earliest as it has been allotted to respondent no.4, but within a period of fifteen days from today.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.