1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2224 OF 2008 (Union of India and others .v. R.N. Bhauray) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 27TH AUGUST, 2008 Heard Shri R.G. Agrawal, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri M.W. Harsulkar, the learned Counsel for the respondent. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 11.01.2008 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal whereby the Original Application filed by the respondent came to be allowed. Considered the contentions canvassed by the respective Counsel and perused the impugned order. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioner allowed the respondent to continue to occupy Type-III quarter along with his son up to 2005 and did not cancel the allotment of Type-III till then. In such circumstances, the Tribunal has concluded that the action of the recovery of penal rent for the alleged unauthorized occupation from 31.03.2003 till February, 2005 is bad in law. 2 In these peculiar facts and circumstances, the finding recorded by the Tribunal cannot be said to be bad in law. It is well settled that after retirement, the department has every right to get the official accommodation provided to the employee vacated in accordance with law and is also entitled to recover the penal rent and damages, if the employee refuses to vacate the official quarter within the stipulated period. However, in the instant case, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances, the conclusion recorded by the Tribunal does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. Petition is devoid of merits and the same is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.