IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8474 of 2006 JAGDISH NARAYAN KUMAR Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 7. 26.09.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. It is not in controversy that the petitioner retired on 28.2.2002. Notwithstanding his retirement, the Respondents permitted him to retain the Government accommodation by order dated 13.2.2002 and 17.12.2002 when the latter specifically recorded that the allotment shall stand cancelled after 31.10.2002. Penal rent of Rs. 81,418/- has been charged from the petitioner by order dated 19.1.2005 for the period 1.11.2002 to 20.12.2004 when he vacated, which appears to be in terms of the extension granted by order dated 17.12.2002. It is also not in controversy that the penal rent has been recovered from the pensionary dues of the petitioner. The petitioner is stated to have filed a representation wherein he alleges that the quantum of penal rent deducted from the petitioner for the period 1.11.2002 to 20.12.2004 was not in consonance with the Rules. The writ application is, therefore, disposed with directions to Respondent no. 3 to decide the representation of the petitioner after giving him opportunity of personal hearing within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. This Court expects that in the event that the Respondent - 2 - finds justification in the claim or part of the claim of the petitioner due credit shall be given to him for the same forthwith. In the event that the Respondent finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 19.1.2005, he shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within the aforesaid period. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)