SECRETARY COORDINATION COMMITTEE OF CENTRAL EXCISE ASSOCIATIONS AND SUDERSHAN KUMAR SHARMA HAVELDAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MA No. 2284/2005 is allowed directing that in the Memo of Parties at P-1, Secretary, Coordination Committee of Central Excise Associations, Commissionerate Ghaziabad be taken as Applicant No. 1 instead of Applicant and below that Shri Sudershan Kumar Sharma (affected person) Haveldar, O/o the Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs Ghaziabad be added as Applicant No. 2.

(2.) Challenge in the OA is made to order dated 10.08.2005 whereby Sr. Accounts Officer (Coord) in the Office of Pr. Chief Controller of Accounts, Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi, directed Pay & Accounts Officers, Ghaziabad, Noida & PAO (C.Ex.) Delhi (under whose jurisdiction Faridabad & Gurgaon falls) �to stop payment to employees posted at these places of the transport allowance at the rates of A-1/A-Class cities with immediate effect. The overpayment of transport allowance already made may be recovered through DDOs with immediate effect in easy instalments�. Vide para-2 of said Memorandum it was stated that �as per the classification of cities for the purpose of entitlement of CCA, Faridabad has been classified as a B-1 city, Ghaziabad as B-2 city, whereas Gurgaon & Noida have both been classified as �C� class cities. Hence, drawl of transport allowance at these places at the rates of �A-1�/�A� class cities is a gross violation of the rules�. Reference was also made to Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of Revenue, O.M. dated 22.02.2002 on Transport Allowance to Central Govt. employees, wherein it had been clarified vide item No. 9 that �Grant of Transport Allowance should be governed by the new classification of cities for the purpose of CCA as given in Annexure-1 to O.M. dated 03.10.1997. The special dispensation extended to HRA/CCA is not applicable to Transport allowance�.

(3.) RESPONDENTS resisted the claim laid and stated that OA is not maintainable as applicants have twisted original facts and rules regarding transport allowance. They are posted at Ghaziabad, and employees posted at Gurgaon, Faridabad and Noid, which do not come under the parameter of group �A� cities were paid excess amount of Transport Allowance on mis-representation and RESPONDENTS have decided to make recovery of excess payment made. There is no restriction to recover excess amount paid. Applicants are entitled to transport allowance only as per rules. As city of Ghaziabad does not fall within the ambit of Group �A� city, relief claimed cannot be allowed. Reliance was placed on Ministry of Finance�s OM dated 03.10.1997 as well as clarification issued on 22.02.2002. During the course of hearing, Shri Hari Nath Ram, learned Counsel for RESPONDENTS maintained that Memorandum dated 10.08.2005 is just and legal and accordingly deserves to be upheld.