19 CISF Personnel Get 5% HRA Arrears For Periods Without Accommodation: Delhi HC Orders Payment

The petitioners, serving in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), sought payment of the unpaid 5% of HRA for periods when the respondents had not provided them accommodation.

They had received 25% HRA but claimed entitlement to the full 30%, relying on prior decisions of the Delhi High Court. The respondents relied on Rule 61 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 to oppose the claims

Rule 61 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 was read in accordance with the Delhi High Court’s decision in Inspector/Exe. Jaspal Singh Mann v. Union of India & Ors., which held that where accommodation is not allotted to a member of the Force, full HRA in lieu of accommodation must be paid

The Court also relied on Shaikh Abdul Khalik v. Director General, Brijesh Kumar v. Director General, CISF, and Anand Kumar v. Union of India, which applied that principle to direct payment of balance HRA for periods without accommodation; it noted that Jaspal Singh Mann and Brijesh Kumar had been upheld by the Supreme Court.

The Court further referred to the Department of Expenditure’s Office Memorandum dated 7 July 2017 and the Division Bench’s decision in Ashish Sharma v. Union of India, which directed payment of the balance 5% HRA.

The Court considered the petitioners’ claims covered by Jaspal Singh Mann and the subsequent decisions consistently applying it.

Although the respondents invoked Rule 61, they could not dispute that entitlement to full HRA where accommodation was not provided had been settled by those authorities. Applying that interpretation to the petitioners’ periods without accommodation, the Court held that they were entitled to the balance HRA claimed

If payment was not made within that period, the amounts would carry interest at 6% per annum until payment. The petitions were disposed of accordingly