Strictly follow govt rules for allotment of Housing to Court staff: Madras HC to administration

Justice SM Subramaniam recently emphasised that the Madras High Court administration should ensure that the rules prescribed for allotment and maintenance of housing quarters to Court staff should be scrupulously followed..The Madras High Court Staff Association had approached the Court praying that the government be directed to allow those members transferred to the Madurai Bench of the Court on a temporary basis to retain the quarters allotted to them in Chennai for a limited period..On this issue, the Court empathised with the petitioners, observing that the grievance raised was certainly reasonable..“Allotments are granted after waiting for number of years. Thus, serving for a short span of time in Madurai Bench, if the family is relocated, it would be difficult for the family to once again get allotment of Government accommodation, after getting re-transferred to Chennai. In those circumstances, the Regulation itself provides that an application seeking retention of accommodation is to be properly submitted by the allottee…”.The Court therefore directed the petitioners to submit applications to the appropriate authorities for the extended retention of the allotted quarters. The authorities were ordered to consider these applications and grant extension on merit by following a uniform procedure. The Court however cautioned that such retention of accommodation cannot exceed the prescribed period as per the Rules in force. .Further, on being appraised of several persons occupying staff quarters in violation of the prescribed terms and conditions, the Court directed their eviction by following fair government procedures laid down in this regard, without further delay..While passing the order, the Court also observed,.“It is of paramount importance that the procedures for allotment issued in Government Regulations are to be followed scrupulously in its letter and spirit.”.Justice Subramaniam observed that governmental accommodation and concessional rates for such accommodation cannot be claimed as a matter of legal right. However it was noted,.“Allotment of houses on concessional rent are to be provided in accordance with the procedures settled by the Competent Authorities. Equal opportunity in allotment is a constitutional mandate. Equality clause enunciated under the Constitution can never be violated by the public authorities..There cannot be any preferences, favouritisms or nepotisms in respect of granting allotment to the staff members of the Madras High Court.”.Apart from Constitutional mandates to ensure equality in Articles 14 and 16, the Court noted that there are state government Regulations passed by the Public Works Department in 1987 and a government order passed in 2016, which lay down the manner in which allotments are to be prioritised..“It is a constitutional mandate and perspective that the third respondent [the Registrar] can never and ever follow the evil principle of arbitrariness, favouritism and nepotism in the matter of treating the public servants/employees. .Allotment of Government accommodation, no doubt, is not a right of an employee. However, consideration is a fundamental right of an employee. Thus, violation of the procedures are certainly in violation of the constitutional right of an employee. Consideration, being a valuable right, conferred on each employee has to be respected and the Regulations in this regard are to be followed scrupulously by the third respondent.”.On examining the legal principles mentioned above, Justice Subramaniam observed that the dominant criteria to be followed in allotment of government accommodation is the seniority of application, as opposed to seniority of appointment..In the instant case, the Court found that the Registrar appeared to have not followed the rules laid down in this regard..“At the outset, this Court is of an opinion that the report of the Registrar (Administration) is absolutely vague and non-specific in respect of the adherence of Rules and Regulations stipulated in the Government Orders.”.The Court found that the Registrar had followed the rule of seniority of appointment in allotting staff quarters, without sufficient explanation..“In the report filed by the third respondent, it is stated that the allotment of quarters are processed based on the seniority i.e., date of appointment. On what basis such a procedure is prescribed has not been explained. .However, the Government prescribes the date of application submitted, seeking willingness to occupy the Government accommodation shall be the seniority. In other words, the date of application submitted by the respective employees are to be registered and the seniority has to be followed based on the date of application in the category wise.”.Furthermore, it was held, implementing the criteria of seniority of appointment would result in discriminatory allotment of government accommodation..“In the event of providing accommodation, based on the date of appointment, then the circumstances will arise that the seniors in date of appointment alone will get Government accommodation and at no point of time, the other junior employees in the same category will get accommodation.”.Therefore, the Court opined that the seniority of application criterion, which had been followed by the government for decades, be followed by the Registrar to avoid all such sort of discrimination and arbitrariness..The Court also referred to the importance of keeping up the morale of employees by ensuring that the authorities adhere to the Rule of Law..“Keeping up the morale amongst the employees is of utmost important. The morale can be maintained only through administrative fairness and by taking decisions by avoiding any kind of arbitrariness or favouritism [sic]….…The institutions will fly high only if the procedures are transparent and the employees are treated in an equal manner. Any unequal treatment will certainly create a frustration in the minds of the employees and the same will paralise the concept of efficiency in the public administration…”.In addition to detailed observations made in its order, the Court has also issued the following directions to be followed in the future:.The third respondent [Registrar] is directed to maintain a Seniority Register and the respective applications received from the employees are to be registered in category wise;The type of accommodations is to be fixed with reference to the category of employees as per the Regulations issued by the Government;Allotments are to be made strictly in accordance with the Rules and Regulations issued by the Government which all are in force;In case of transfers, a specific application is to be submitted by the allottee/employee, seeking permission for retention of accommodation and on receipt of the same, the same is to be considered on merits and as per the Regulations in force and issue suitable orders recording the reasons for retention or extension;The third respondent is directed to inspect all the Government accommodations allotted to the High Court employees with the assistance of the Vigilance Department of the High Court and identify the genuineity or otherwise of the occupation of the respective quarters and ensure necessary actions to eradicate the illegalities or irregularities if any exist by following the procedures contemplated under the Rules and Regulations;If any illegal occupations are found contrary to the terms and conditions of the allotment order, then eviction proceedings are to be initiated without any further delay by following the procedures contemplated for such eviction.