IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 8823 of 2008 Date of decision: 29.04.2011 ________________________________________________________________ P.C. Gupta. .....Petitioner. Versus The State of H.P. & others. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Surender Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anshul Bansal, Addl. AG. V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral). The petition has been filed on the following substantive prayers vide para 7(i) and (ii): “7(i) That the impugned Annexure A-10, dated nil may be quashed and set aside. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to release a sum of Rs. 55,758/- to the applicant forthwith alongwith interest @ 18% per annum.” 2. In reply, the respondents have taken the following stand by way of preliminary submissions vide para 3: “3. That the applicant (Shri P.C. Gupta) retired from the service after attaining the age of superannuation on dated 31.12.1998 and he had to vacate the quarter/Govt. accommodation upto 30.04.1999, as per Govt. rules, but the applicant vacated the Govt. accommodation only on 30.04.2000 i.e., after (12 months) one year late. So penal rent Rs. 55,758/- as per the Govt. rules was charged from the applicant. The detail is annexed as Annexure R/4.” 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. .....2..... 3. The record reveals that representation dated 03.05.2000, Annexure A-9, submitted by the petitioner against impugned action on the part of the respondents to withhold a sum of ` 55,758/-, out of the amount of gratuity payable to the petitioner on account of retention of the official accommodation allotted to him even beyond his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation, is pending decision with respondent No. 2. It would be seen that the petitioner retired as an Assistant, i.e., a low paid employee. The prayer made by him in the aforesaid representation dated 03.05.2000, Annexure A-9, is as under: “Sir, I, therefore, earnestly request that penal rent may not be charged from me for the period other than the prescribed limit. However, I am agreed to pay the rent 10 times more of the normal rent which I had been paying during the period of Nahan Foundry Ltd. In case it is not possible the rent what is being paid to the employees by the Govt. may be recovered from me. I shall ever remain thankful to you for this act of kindness and mercy.” 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2/competent authority to consider the aforesaid representation dated 03.05.2000, Annexure A-9, moved by the petitioner sympathetically and take a final decision in the matter within two months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner after affording an opportunity of being heard to him, if so desired. Needless to say that consequential benefits, if any, shall ensue the decision on the representation. .....3..... 5. In order to supplement the submissions made in the representation, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file additional documents, if any. 6. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP(s), if any. Copy dasti. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 29th April, 2011 (virender)