THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 5299 of 1998 O R D E R: This Writ Petition has been instituted, aggrieved by the order passed on 5th January 1998 by the 1st respondent – Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Kakinada, directing the 2nd respondent – Munsif Magistrate, Tuni, East Godavari District to collect a sum of Rs.29,403/- from the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner was working as an L.D. Clerk at the relevant point of time, at the Munsif Magistrate’s Court, Tuni in East Godavari District. Earlier, she worked as an L.D. Clerk at the III Additional Munsif Magistrate Court, Kakinada up to November 1995. She has been transferred on administrative grounds to the Court at Tuni. She was relieved of her duties at Kakinada on 27th November 1995 After Noon. While she was working at Kakinada, she was allotted Government quarter C2 (old C type) on 5th August 1993. She was in occupation of the said quarter, but upon her transfer to Tuni, she was required to vacate the same. However, she submitted a representation to the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Department, Kakinada for retaining the quarter with a view to secure better treatment for her old aged parents and for the sake of schooling facilities for her children. However, the fact remains that she has vacated the quarter on 14th June 1997 i.e. nearly an year and half after she has been relieved at Kakinada. However, she continued to pay the rent fixed for the quarter at the rate of Rs.584/- from 1st December 1995 to June 1997 by remitting the same through challans at the Treasury attached to the State Bank of India, Kakinada. On 5th January 1998, the 1st respondent passed unilaterally orders directing the Munsif Magistrate, Tuni to recover a sum of Rs.29,403/- from the salary and allowances payable to the writ petitioner towards penal rent for occupying the quarter at Kakinada, though she has been transferred and relieved thereat. It will be appropriate to notice that rent has been calculated at the rate of Rs.1671/- per month for the period of her occupation from 28th December 1995. No explanation has been offered as to how this penal rent at the rate of Rs.1671/- per month has been worked out. Therefore, this present Writ Petition has been instituted calling in question the correctness of the said orders. It was stated in paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit filed by the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Department, Kakinada that the District Collector and Magistrate at Kakinada has been communicated the fact that the writ petitioner has been transferred to Tuni only on 14th August 1996. Therefore, the District Collector, in turn, passed orders on 23rd August 1996, directing the Executive Engineer to take action for the unauthorized occupation and continuation in quarter No. C2 by the writ petitioner. Hence, a notice was issued on 7th September 1996 by the Executive Engineer to vacate the premises as the occupation of the writ petitioner beyond the permissible period after transfer from Kakinada amounts to illegal and unauthorized occupation of Government accommodation. It was asserted that the said notice was received by the writ petitioner, but there was no reply submitted by her. It was also further asserted that subsequent notices, dated 25th September 1996, 29th January 1997 and 18th March 1997 have been issued to the writ petitioner and they were received by her as well. A reply was said to have been submitted by the writ petitioner explaining the circumstances that led her to continue to occupy the Government quarter at Kakinada. In those set of circumstances, it is stated that the order has been passed directing the Munsif Magistrate at Tuni to recover a sum of Rs.25,065/- towards penal rent for the period up to 31st March 1997. Since the writ petitioner had actually vacated the Government quarter only on 14th June 1997, the penal rent was thus calculated right up to 14th June 1997, which had worked out to Rs.29,403/-. Hence, the said sum has been ordered to be recovered from the writ petitioner. In paragraph 8 of the counter, it was suggested that since the writ petitioner had continued to occupy the Government accommodation beyond the permissible period after transfer to Tuni, she is liable to pay penal rent as per the Government Memo No. 3577/Accommodation-B/66-13 (Home Department), Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, dated 22nd April 1960. In view of the said Memo, the penal rent is stated, in the counter-affidavit, to have been calculated as under: 1. Rent as per local market (considered as HRA received) = Rs.2315 (Basic pay) X 20% (HRA) X 3 times (penalty) = 1389 2. Standard rent = Rs.94 (for C2 Quarter) X 3 times (penalty) = 282 ------------- Total penal rent per month 1671 ------------ It is baffling to note from the above calculation that the basic pay of Rs.2315/- multiplied by 20% HRA and multiplied by three times being the penalty could not have worked out to Rs.1389/-. When once a penal rent, which is three times the rent as per the local market is already sought to be recovered, question of multiplying the standard rent of Rs.94/- by three more times representing the penalty and then adding it to Rs.1389/- would not arise. This matter has undergone several adjournments. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings Department had pleaded her inability to produce either the Government Memo or offer any plausible explanation as to how this amount of Rs.1671/- has been worked out. She submits that her efforts made have not produced the desired result. If the standard rent is Rs.94/- for the Government accommodation of C2 type at Kakinada, and if the same is multiplied by three times, it works out to Rs.282/-. One can understand the said amount being collected representing the penal rent for the unauthorized occupation beyond the permissible limits after the writ petitioner’s transfer from Kakinada. The writ petitioner has asserted in her affidavit filed in support of the above Writ Petition that she has remitted rent at the rate of Rs.584/- per month, obviously at double the rate of penal rent calculated as above (Rs.282/-). No reference was made to this fact or nor was it controverted in the counter-affidavit. Therefore, one has to assume that the writ petitioner has paid and remitted the rent at the rate of Rs.584/- per month for the period of her occupation of the Government quarter at Kakinada beyond 27th December 1997. The writ petitioner shall produce appropriate proof in this regard before the 1st respondent – Executive Engineer, within a period of 30 days from today. If the writ petitioner has already paid rent at the rate of Rs.584/- every month, the same shall be construed as the appropriate rent payable by her for the Government accommodation under her occupation for the period after her transfer to Tuni, as the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the writ petitioner has not drawn HRA for this period and if she produces satisfactory proof in that regard, she shall not be made liable to pay any further amount, as amount of Rs.584/- is double to the penal rent calculated at three times the standard rent. If, on the other hand, the writ petitioner had failed to pay this amount of Rs.584/- per month till 14th June 1997, the date on which she vacated the Government quarter, the 1st respondent – Executive Engineer is free to seek recovery of such amount from the salary and allowances payable to the writ petitioner by the competent drawing and disbursing officer. Since no clear material is brought on record by the 1st respondent as to how the penal rent at the rate of Rs.1671/- is liable to be collected from the writ petitioner, I am not in a position to accept the contention canvassed in this regard both in the counter-affidavit as well as in the impugned order. In this view of the matter, the impugned order is liable to be quashed for lacking any authority for seeking to recover as high an amount as Rs.29,403/- from the salary and allowances of the writ petitioner. The Writ Petition stands allowed to the extent indicated supra. No costs. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 18th November 2009 ksld