CWP No.4044/1989 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.4044/1989 Date of Decision: 17.9.2009. Sukhdev Singh Hundal and others ..........Petitioners. Versus Union of India and others ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: None for the parties. 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? JASWANT SINGH,J. Petitioners, who are working as Lecturers except petitioner no.5 (who is Principal) in different colleges situated within the State of Punjab have filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of prohibition, restraining the respondents from including the component of dearness allowance as a part of the salary or perquisite while calculating the total income of the petitioners under the provisions of the Income Tax Act,1961 (for short the 1961 Act) for assessment/deduction of income tax. No one has appeared either on behalf of the petitioners or CWP No.4044/1989 2 on behalf of the respondents. We have perused the paper book of the case. The only point involved in this case as to whether the receipt of “dearness allowance” by an employee is in the nature of income entailing tax liability under the provisions of 1961 Act. The controversy involved in the present case is no longer res integra as it has already been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in (2000) 243 ITR 143(SC) Karamchari Union v. Union of India and others that dearness allowance, city compensatory allowance and house rent allowance would be taxable income. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Karamchari Union's case (supra) we find no merit in the present writ petition which deserves to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly. (Jaswant Singh) (M.M.Kumar) Judge Judge 17.9.2009. joshi