IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13700 of 2009 YUGAL KISHORE SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 04/11/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The controversy in this case relates to imposition of penal rent for a Government quarter. The submission is that under Rule-13 of the Government House Allotment (Patna Central Pool) Rules in the event that an employee does not have a house within eight kilo metres radius from his place of posting he is entitled to official accommodation. The petitioner not having such house within the prescribed radius was allotted quarter No.E/30 when he was posted at Sakri Division. He was issued a show cause notice on 21.5.2008 that he was in unauthorized occupation of the quarter, not entitled to it under Rule-13 of the Act. The petitioner replied to the same when the Superintending Engineer on 28.6.2008 and the Executive Engineer on 3.7.2008 have held in favour of his entitlement. The impugned order dated 13.6.2009/19.8.2009 imposing penal rent does not take into consideration the aforesaid recommendations of the Superintending Engineer and the Executive Engineer, 2 on facts, that the petitioner was not in unauthorized occupation. No useful purpose is going to be served by keeping this writ application pending in the nature of the controversy and the documents produced by the petitioner. The writ application is disposed with directions to the Executive Engineer, respondent No.4, to take a fresh decision in the matter in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order which shall appropriately deal with the letters dated 28.6.2008 and 3.7.2008 so that judicial review of the order, if the occasion arises, shall be possible. Let such fresh orders be passed by respondent No.4 within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Needless to state that till such fresh exercise is not carried out by respondent No.4 and fresh appropriate orders passed, no further implementation shall be done of the orders dated 13.6.2009 and 19.8.2009. In the event that any deductions have already been made, the question of refund or further recovery shall necessarily depend on the outcome of such fresh decision by respondent No.4. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)