Allowed

Dr. Jayamol Mathew v. Ministry of Home Affairs

Kerala HC24 Nov 2021WP(C)/18254/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by a BSF officer seeking release of transport allowance for moving her car under own propulsion. Court found the rejection based on lowest applicable rate baseless. Ordered respondents to pay claimed amount of Rs.18,024/-.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release transportation and personal conveyance claimed at Rs.24/- per km for 751 km (Rs.18,024/-). Payment within one month.

Dr. Jayamol Mathew Vs Ministry of Home Affairs — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

DR. JAYAMOL MATHEW, AGED 52 YEARS (IRL NO.19771878), W/O.MATHEW VARUGHESE, CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER (SELECTION GRADE), BORDER SECURITY FORCE, STATE HEADQUARTERS, HOUSE NO.ANRA 97C, ASAN NAGAR, VALLAKADAVU P.O., MUTTATHARA, TRIVANDRUM-695009.

¶8

BY ADVS. AJIT JOY SRI.ANEESH JAMES

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.

¶11

2 DIRECTOR GENERAL,BORDER SECURITY FORCE, CGO COMPLEX, LODI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110003.

¶12

3 THE DIRECTOR (A/CS),PAY AND ACCOUNTS DIVISION, BORDER SECURITY FORCE, 2ND FLOOR, PUSHPA BHAWAN, MADANGIR,

¶13

4 ADDL.R4.HQRS FRONTIER SPL OPS ODISSA (AT BANGALORE) YELAHANKA, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGLORE, KARNATAKA, PIN -560063.

¶14

5 ADDL.R5.DIG, SHQ BSF, MUTTATHARA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695008. ADDL. R4 & R5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 20.10.2021 IN IA NO.1/2021. BY ADV SRI.N.S.DAYA SINDHU SHREE HARI

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner, is an officer of BSF. She was under orders of transfer from Bangalore to Thiruvananthapuram. She had to transport her Hyundai Verna car to her destination. Accordingly, that was sent by its own propulsion. Claim was submitted towards her transfer allowances, wherein the claim for vehicle transport was declined. Challenging it, the petitioner has approached this court. Statement has been filed by the second respondent and third respondent on behalf of the additional respondents No.4 and 5, as submitted by the learned CGC.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to Ext.P6, which is a letter dated 25.07.2019, which

¶21

provided the rate for places connected by rail and places not connected by rail. The prescribed rate in case of transportation by passenger train on rail, whether it was connected by rail or not connected by the rail under the above

¶22

¶23

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020

¶24

remains to be same. It was clarified in paragraph 24 & 28 of the counter affidavit that the arguments set up by the DDOs for restricting the claims with the rates of VPU fare was not tenable in the light of provisions of SR.116, which clearly says that such claims have to be restricted by the passenger train fare only.

¶25

In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to Ext.9 (a) which is the relevant portion of SR116. It refers to the rates applicable, when the vehicle is sent under its own propulsion. In that, the prescribed rate was clarified as the rates notified by the Directorate of Transport for taxi and auto rickshaw, at the starting point. Since, the starting point in this case was Bangalore, the learned counsel relied on Ext.P9(b), which is a notification dated 03.03.2018 issued by the Deputy Secretary to Government, Transport Department, Karnataka Government. Since the vehicle is a Clause C vehicle, the rate applicable is Rs.48/- upto 4 kms and thereafter at the rate of Rs.24/- per km, subject to the maximum. Ext.P2(b) is a claim submitted

¶26

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020 4

¶27

by the petitioner. It shows that towards transportation of personal conveyance from STC BSF Bangalore to SHQ BSF Thiruvananthapuram, she claims a sum of Rs.18,024/(Rupees eighteen thousand twenty four only) calculated 751 kms with Rs.24/- per km, which was the rate prescribed in Ext.P9. According to the petitioner, this was sought to be corrected by the authorities reducing it to Rs.15/- per km, thereby reducing it to Rs.11,265/-. Ultimately, no transportation charges was granted under this head.

¶28

The learned CGC, relied on the contention in the counter and tried to justify this on the basis of the lowest rate applicable. In the light of Ext.P9, evidently the rejection of the claim is baseless. The distance being 751 kms, the rate claimed at Rs.24/- per km seems to be less than the rate mentioned Ext.P9(b).

¶29

Having considered this, I find no reason in refusing the claim set up by the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is liable to be allowed with a direction to the respondents No.2

¶30

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020

¶31

¶32

to 5, to release the transportation and personal conveyance as claimed in Ext.P2, calculated at the rate of Rs.24/- per km for a distance of 751 km at Rs.18,024/- (Rupees eighteen thousand twenty four only). The Writ Petition stands allowed. The amount shall be paid within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶35

R.AV

¶36

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18254/2020

¶39

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶40

EXHIBIT	P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER ORDER OF THE PETITIONER THROUGH DEPARTMENTAL SIGNAL DATED 31.05.2019.
EXHIBIT	P2 NIL
EXHIBIT	P2(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S TRANSFER TA CLAIM VIDE LETTER NO.ACCTS/SHQ- TVM/306/2018/9473/ DATED 27.08.2019.
EXHIBIT	P2(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE BILL NO.53 DATED 27.08.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT	P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTERS PERS- II/PG/TASK-08/BILL/2019/9641 DATED 21.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE COMMANDANT(PERS- II) FHQ BSF PERS-II SEC, NEW DELHI TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT	P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NUMBER TVM/301/2018/12939/DATED 18.11.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT	P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER PERS- II/PG/TASK-08/BILL/2020/832 DATED 05.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE OFFG.COMMANDANT, FHQ BSF PERS-II SEC, NEW DELHI.
EXHIBIT	P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.10- 64/PRAO/ADM/MHA/MISC/MHA/2019/5297-5303 DATED 25.07.2019 OF THE DIRECTOR (A/CS) PAY AND ACCOUNTS DIVISION, BORDER SECURITY FORCE.
EXHIBIT	P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NUMBERED L/NO.T/TA/PERSONAL/01 DATED 30.01.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶41

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020 7

¶42

EXHIBIT	P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PERS/TRANSFER TA/JM/2020/2702-05 DATED 05.03.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT	P9 NIL
EXHIBIT	P9(A) A TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF SR 116 PERTAINING TO RATES OF ALLOWANCE FOR TRANSPORTATION OF MOTOR CAR TAKEN FROM THE BOOK SWAMY'S CENTRAL GOVERNMENT RULES.
EXHIBIT	P9(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE PRESCRIBED RATES FOR TAXI FARE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH TRANSPORT SECRETARIAT NOTIFICATION NO.SARIE 66 SAEPA 2017, BANGALORE, DATED 03.03.2018.
EXHIBIT	P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION NO.CMO(MED)/SHQ TVM/2020/9767 DATED 22.07.2020, TO THE DIRECTOR (A/CS), PAY & ACCOUNTS DIVISION, BSF.
EXHIBIT	P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ACCTTS/SHQ TVM/352/2020/9870-14 DATED 23.07.2020 OF THE BSF SECTOR HEADQUARTERS.
EXHIBIT	P12 A TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 22.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE DIVISION OFFICE, COMMERCIAL BRANCH, BANGALORE OF THE SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY.
EXHIBIT	P13 A TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 13.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, COMMERCIAL BRANCH, BANGALORE OF THE SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY.

¶43

RESPONDENT'S(S) EXHIBITS

¶44

EXHIBIT R2(A)

¶45

TRUE COPY OF THE FHQ PERS DTE SIGNAL

¶46

WP(C) NO. 18254 OF 2020 8

¶47

	NO.R/3206 DATED 31.05.2019
EXHIBIT R2(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE ASSUMPTION REPORT NO.SHQ TVM/ESTT/CA/110/2019/8490 516 DATED 03.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL, BSF, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
EXHIBIT R2(C)	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL NO.53 DATED 27 AUG 2019 ISSUED BY THE CMO(SG) FOR RS.1,98,564/-
EXHIBIT R2(D)	TRUE COPY OF THE SHO BSF TVM L/NO.ACCTTS/SHQ TVM/306/2019/9473 DATED 27.08.2019
EXHIBIT R2(E)	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICTION OF DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA VIE THEIR L/NO.B1/212/2018/TRANS DATED 12.12.2018.
EXHIBIT R2(F)	TRUE COPY OF THE SHQ BSF TVM L/NO.ACCTTS/SHQ TVM/301/2019/12939 DATED 18.11.2019
EXHIBIT R2(G)	TRUE COPY OF THE L/NO.PERS-II/PG-II/TASK- 08/BILL/2020/832 DATED 05.02.2020.
EXHIBIT RS(H)	TRUE COPY OF THE L/NO.PERS/TRANSFER TA/JM/2020/2702-05 DATED 05.03.2020.
EXHIBIT R2 (I)	TRUE COPY OF THE FRIGHT RATE TABLE

Dr. Jayamol Mathew v. Ministry of Home Affairs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Jayamol Mathew v. Ministry of Home Affairs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh P.G. Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Vipin S., Vs Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Ltd.

Harikumar P.R., Vs Union of India

Sudheesh T.S Vs the Cochin Municipal Corporation

Ramaiah K. Vs the Departmental Promotion Committee

Building & Road Workers Federation Vs State of Kerala