CESTAT Member Gets Relief from CAT against eviction from quarters
A Principal Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise was appointed as a Member of CESTAT and posted to the Principal Bench at Delhi where he joined on 06.07.2015.
He is entitled to Type-VII accommodation and he applied for accommodation under general pool on 06.07.2015. Vide allotment letter dated 10.08.2015, Type VI-A house bearing address 6-2-C, Floor - 5, Sector-13, R.K. Puram, New Delhi was allotted to him. He took technical possession of the flat on 11.08.2015 and physical possession of the flat was taken by him on 27.08.2015. Vide letter dated 04.11.2015, he was informed by the Assistant Director of Estates that he was not entitled to residential accommodation out of general pool in Delhi and that since the allotment was made inadvertently, it was cancelled with immediate effect. He made a representation to Assistant Director of Estates on 04.11.2015 followed by another representation dated 05.11.2015. The Assistant Director of Estates rejected the representation dated 04.11.2015 vide letter dated 13.11.2015 and directed the applicant to vacate the accommodation immediately to avoid payment of damage charges or any litigation proceeding.
The aggrieved Member approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The CAT stayed the cancellation as well as eviction. ( - 11 01 2016)
Recently, the CAT passed the Final Order in this quashing the impugned order of the Assistant Director of Estates dated 04.11.2015. The Tribunal directed the respondents to continue the allotment of quarter no. 6-2-C, Floor - 5, Sector-13, R.K. Puram, New Delhi to the applicant (CESTAT MEMBER) for the period of his tenure as Member (Technical) as per existing provisions of Government Residences (General Pool in Delhi) Rules 1963 including retention after completion of tenure for period specified under the said rules.
In DDT 2762, I wrote,
This is the way, an Hon'ble Member of the Tribunal, whom we call Lordship, is treated by a Department of the Government. The might of the Government does not leave judges. If a Member of the Tribunal has to go round lawyers and courts to be allowed to stay in the house allotted to him, how can he peacefully discharge his duties as a Tribunal Member? This perhaps amounts to contempt of court on the part of the concerned babu in the Ministry of Urban Development.
As such, it is not a great favour, the Government is doing by allotting an accommodation for the Member. He would get a House Rent Allowance of about 50,000 rupees if he doesn't get that government accommodation. Even a Tribunal Member had to approach another tribunal to retain a house legally allotted to him.
Anyway, the Hon'ble Member is assured of a roof for as long as he is posted in Delhi, though he had to bear the cost of this litigation - the CAT has not allowed any cost.