P.BONNERJEA, J. - (1.) This application under Sec. 29 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, was admitted by this Tribunal on 15 -2 -1988.
(2.) The applicant joined the railway service on 28th May, 1974 as Shed Khalasi and was promoted to the post of Clerk (Class III) on 29th October, 1979. During the period between 1974 to March 1982 the applicant used) reside in a rented flat and was thus withdrawing the house rent allowance. The applicant's father, who was also a railway servant was allotted a railway quarter at Kharagpur being quarter No.1/OS/17, Unit No.11, Dhansingh Maidan, P.O. Kharagpur, Dist. Midnapore. The applicant alongwith is family started to reside with his father in the same quarter with effect from 1st April, 1982 and since then the applicant has been residing with is father and sharing the same quarter. The applicant states that no house rent allowance has been drawn by him since 1st April, 1982 and has given due notice to the railway authorities that he has been sharing his father's Quarters since 1st April, 1982. The applicant's father retired from service, with effect from 1st July, 1983 as Diesel Shunter which is also a Class III post. The applicant contends that the quarter so allotted to his father should be allotted to him as he is entitled to the same type of quarter and there rill be no difficulty in regularising the allotment of the quarter in his name the applicant also relies on a rule framed by the Railway Board (annexure 'A' to the application) which provides that if the father and son are both railway servants and are sharing the same quarter and if the father retires from service, the son is entitled to get the said quarter in his name. On retirement of his father, the applicant made several representations to the appropriate authorities for regularising the said quarter in his name. The representations of the applicant were wrongly rejected on 6th June, 1985, which is annexure 'C' to the application. From that order, the applicant referred an appeal on 9th July, 1985 to the appropriate authority but the aid appeal was also turned down on 23rd June, 1986. The applicant again made a representation and/or appeal on 4th August, 1987. In the mean time Railway Board's circular whereby it is provided as follows : In accordance with the orders contained in their letter referred to above, in the case of a railway servant who having been allotted railway accommodation, retires from service or dies in service, his/her son, daughter, wife, husband or father may be allotted railway accommodation on out -of -turn basis provided that the said relation is a railway servant eligible for railway accommodation and had been sharing accommodation with the retiring or deceased railway servant for at least six - months before the date of retirement or death. This circular is dated 27th February, 1971 and is at annexure 'E' to the application. Thereafter, the father of the applicant was served with an conviction order dated 30th October, 1987 and the applicant states that the retirement benefits of the father of the applicant have not been settled as the said quarter has not been vacated.
(3.) The respondents have filed their reply where the question of limitation has been raised. In the reply, the respondents deny and dispute the contention of the applicant that he had been sharing the quarter with his father and also that he is entitled to any out -of -turn accommodation. The respondents also allege that the applicant has suppressed certain facts. But these points were not pressed on behalf of the respondents at the time of hearing. The respondents counsel's main argument was that the applicant was not entitled to the type of quarter allotted to his father.;