- (1.) This special appeal arises from a judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 8 November 2013 and an order passed in a review petition dated 15 September 2014.
(2.) The appellants are Head Constables or, as the case may be, Constables in the Provincial Armed Constabulary1. A writ petition had been filed before a learned Single Judge by 237 Head Constables/Constables, seeking the payment of House Rent Allowance2 on the basis of a Government Order dated 14 June 1999, on the ground that they had not been provided official accommodation. That writ petition was disposed of by a learned Single Judge by an order dated 8 December 2010. The learned Single Judge was of the view that the grievance should be examined by the Principal Secretary (Home) of the State Government and that in order to avoid further litigation, it was desirable for the State to issue a circular either for the payment of HRA to Head Constables/Constables, or if it was not to be so provided, by indicating the reasons for the decision. Following the order of the learned Single Judge dated 8 December 2010, the State Government issued a circular on 25 April 2011 to the effect that the Constables who are housed in barracks would not be paid HRA. Thereafter, a representation was submitted to the State Government which was rejected in the month of February 2012 by the Commandant 44th Battalion PAC, Meerut. That led to the filing of a writ petition before the learned Single Judge, seeking a quashing of the decision of the Commandant. Besides, a mandamus was sought to the State to pay HRA to the writ petitioners together with arrears in accordance with two Government Orders respectively dated 11 June 1999 and 8 December 2008. These two Government Orders apply generally to the employees of the State. The writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge by a judgment and order dated 8 November 2013 in the following terms:- "In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed. The State Government in particular and all the respondents in general are directed to provide appropriate H.R.A. to all the police officials including the petitioners, who are made to stay in 'barracks' and are not allotted appropriate 'residential accommodation' commensurating their status, rank and as per their entitlement. No costs."
(3.) Prior to the aforesaid decision of the learned Single Judge, a circular was issued by the State Government on 19 October 2013 under which a provision was made for the payment of Family Accommodation Allowance3 to employees of the police department who had been provided accommodation in barracks. As a matter of fact, it appears that the Sixth Pay Commission4 had, in the course of its recommendations, dealt with the issue as to whether HRA should be provided to personnel of Central Reserve Police Force5 who had not been allotted rent free accommodation. The recommendation of the SPC provided as follows:- "Recommendations - CILQ 7.19.42, Presently, Compensation in lieu of Quarters (CILQ) is allowed to 100% personnel in the Subordinate Officers (Sos) grade in all CPMFs barring CRPF where only 25% of the personnel in the grade are eligible for which allowance. CRPF has demanded that the facility should be extended to all the SOs in their case as well. The Commission finds merit in this demand. It is recommended that the facility of CILQ should be allowed to 100% personnel in the SOs grade in CRPF as well. Another demand has been made to extend House Rent Allowance (HRA) to all the CPMFs personnel who have not been allotted rent free accommodation or are eligible for CILQ. CILQ is given to a segment of force personnel as per the authorized strength who have not been provided rent-free family accommodation at the duty station. CILQ includes the element of HRA and license fee as per prescribed rates. Personnel who are not eligible for either rent free accommodation or CILQ are expected to stay in the non-family barracks from the functional requirement. While staying in non-family barracks on functional considerations is justified, it may not be appropriate to deny any compensation for housing the family of these personnel. HRA at normal rates cannot be paid to these personnel as they are staying in barracks provided by the Government. However, justification exists for providing a separate family accommodation allowance for housing the family members of this category of employees. In consonance with the recommendations made for similarly placed defence personnel, the Commission recommends that a new Family Accommodation Allowance at the lowest rate of HRA should be paid to all the CPMF's personnel who are not eligible for either rent free accommodation/HRA or CILQ. The rates of this allowance will increase by 25% each time the price index increases by 50%.";