Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 976 of 2019 Petitioner :- Chandra Pal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
This petition lays challenge to a notice dated 9 October 2018 and a consequential order dated 16 December 2018 mandating recoveries of penal rent for continued unauthorized occupation of a government quarter. The petitioner who was appointed in 2007 in the P.A.C. was allotted an official accommodation which he continues to retain till date. It further transpires from the record that although he was transferred on 5 July 2018 to Panki, Kanpur he has continued to retain the official accommodation at Agra. On being queried whether the petitioner has been allotted official accommodation at Panki, learned counsel for the petitioner in the absence of instructions was unable to clarify this position. On a further query as to whether the petitioner had in fact furnished a reply to the show cause notice dated 9 October 2018 also no satisfactory reply could be given. The petitioner's claim to continue to occupy the accommodation in question at Agra rests upon a Government Order dated 21 November 2016 and more particularly paragraph 4(2) thereof in light of which it is contended that the son and the daughter of the petitioner are studying in Classes -IX and XI, and hence he is entitled to retain the accommodation till they complete Classes X and XII.
Learned Standing Counsel however points out that this clause of the Government Order would have no application since the petitioner has been transferred from P.A.C. to the Civil Police and that this aspect is dealt with and noted in the impugned show cause notice. More fundamentally the Court notes that in case the petitioner was desirous of continuing to occupy the premises at Agra it was incumbent upon him to apply to the respondents for being permitted to continue to occupy the premises in question. Before this Court, it is not disputed that such an application has been made for the first time only on 9 January 2019.
Consequently, the Court finds no error in the decision taken by the respondents.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 Arun K. Singh (Yashwant Varma, J.)