Facts
The Petitioner was employed as a Foot Constable in the Transport Department of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD)
Source reference: p. 1, para. 2He filed a claim for night duty allowance for the period of August to September 2013, during which he performed night shifts
Source reference: p. 1, para. 2His claim was based on a Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) Office Memorandum (OM) dated October 4, 1989
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2The Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) rejected the claim in an order dated May 15, 2019, on the grounds that the OM was inapplicable to GNCTD employees and that the petitioner had not worked extra hours during the day to justify a night allowance
Source reference: p. 2, para. 3-4The petitioner challenged the Tribunal's decision before the High Court under Article 226
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5Issues
1. Whether the DoPT OM dated October 4, 1989, is applicable to employees of the GNCTD so as to create an enforceable right to night duty allowance
Source reference: p. 2, para. 6; p. 3, para. 11Law Applied
The Court applied the legal maxim Ubi jus ibi remedium, establishing that a legal remedy cannot exist in the absence of a vested legal right
Source reference: p. 2, para. 7It further interpreted the scope of the DoPT OM dated October 4, 1989, noting it applies strictly to "Resident (Night Duty) Staff in the Central Secretariat and Allied Offices" of the Government of India
Source reference: p. 3, para. 10Reasoning
The Court found that the petitioner’s claim lacked a foundation in any enforceable rule, regulation, or executive instruction
Source reference: p. 2, para. 6The Court clarified that the mere marking of a copy to such entities does not ipso facto extend the application of the OM to their employees
Source reference: p. 3, para. 10By its own terms, the OM is categorical in its limited application to the Central Secretariat and Allied Offices
Source reference: p. 3, para. 10Therefore, the petitioner, as a GNCTD employee, could not invoke the OM to claim a night duty allowance
Source reference: p. 3, para. 11The Court concluded that in the absence of a specific provision, neither the Tribunal nor the Court has the authority to grant such allowances
Source reference: p. 3, para. 12Holding
The Court answered the issue in the negative, holding that the petitioner failed to cite any applicable rule or instruction entitling him to the relief sought
Finding no error in the Tribunal’s decision, the High Court dismissed the writ petition
Source reference: p. 4, para. 13Original Court PDF
Sanjay KuamrvsGovt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in