R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) THESE two writ petitions are taken up together and being disposed of by this common judgment, as common questions are involved in these cases.
(2.) THE only question is as to whether the petitioners, who have been allotted staff quarters, are entitled to receive the House Rent Allowance (H.R.A. for short) or not. Admittedly, the petitioners were allotted the premises as 'staff quarters ' on a nominal rent. The standard rent was much higher i.e. about 7 times more than the rent to be paid for occupying such staff quarters.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner relied on several documents and submitted that as per the relevant rules they are also entitled to receive the H.R.A. But I find on going through those documents that those relate to the 'rental premises '. The nominal amount charged against occupation of a staff quarter is also called 'rent '. In that context, the documents relied on by the petitioners show that those rental premises are not the Government premises and, therefore, the persons occupying those rental premises are entitled to get H.R.A. The word 'allotment ' is used while allotting a 'staff quarter ' as well while allotting rental premises on standard rent. Thus, the documents relied on by the petitioners clearly show that the employees who have been allotted 'rental premises ' on a standard rent will also be entitled for H.R.A. It further appears that some employees who were allotted staff quarters at Ranchi and Jamshedpur were wrongly paid the H.R.A. Therefore, an order was passed for recovery of the same in installments. The petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 3240 of 1994 (R) has been allotted the staff quarter in question on a monthly rent of Rs. 44.65 paise in the year 1987. In C.W. J.C. No. 1088 of 1995 (R), there are 19 petitioners. Some of them have been allotted flat/quarters on a monthly rental of Rs. 24.15 paise, and some were allotted staff quarters on a monthly rent of Rs. 16.17 paise.;