Deducted TA/DA must be reimbursed if rules do not specify travel mode or food items.

The applicant, Anil Barjatiya, a retired Dy. CCA, filed an original application against deductions from his salary made in December 2009, January 2010, February 2010, and March 2010, totaling Rs. 9273/-, Rs. 6402/-, Rs. 4952/-, and Rs. 11889/- respectively.

These deductions were recovery against his Traveling Allowance (TA) claims for tours undertaken between November 25, 2008, and July 27, 2009.

The respondents contended that the applicant was granted Rs. 55,290/- as TA advance and submitted 18 TA bills for journeys performed by his own scooter without prior approval, despite instructions to use public transport.

The respondents restricted his TA claims to sleeper class fare, citing OM No. 19030/3/2008-E.TV Dated 23.09.2008, which allowed road travel between places connected by rail if the fare did not exceed the train fare of the entitled class.

Additionally, the respondents rejected reimbursement for certain food items (GHEE, KAJU BADAM, CHAVYANPRAS, GLUCON-D, PARLE BISCUITS) in his food bills, stating they were not in the spirit of the 23.09.2008 orders.

The applicant, whose grade pay was Rs. 5400/- during the relevant period, argued his travel entitlement was Economy Class by Air/AC II Tier by train, not sleeper class.

He also contended that there was no specific instruction to use public transport and that Rule 3 of Annexure RJ-1 only stipulated a daily food reimbursement limit of Rs. 200/-, without specifying food items.

Whether the respondents were justified in restricting the applicant's TA claim to sleeper class fare for journeys performed by his own scooter, despite his grade pay entitling him to a higher class of travel and the absence of specific instructions to use public transport.

Whether the respondents were justified in rejecting the reimbursement of certain food items from the applicant's food bills on the ground that they were not "in the spirit of the rules/orders dated 23.09.2008".

The court primarily applied the Office Memorandum (OM) No. 19030/3/2008-E.TV Dated 23.09.2008, specifically Sub Rule 'A' of Rule 2 regarding travel entitlement based on grade pay, which for an employee with Rs. 5400/- grade pay was Economy Class by Air/AC II Tier by train.

It also considered Sub-Clause (ii) of Clause (b) of Sub Rule 'D' of Rule 2 of the same OM concerning mileage allowance for road travel by personal conveyance, finding no mention of a prior approval requirement for such modes.

Furthermore, the court referenced Rule 3 of Annexure RJ-1 (relating to Daily Allowance on Tour) which stipulates a maximum reimbursement of Rs. 200/- per day for food bills, without specifying permissible food items.

The court found that the respondents' action of restricting the applicant's TA claim to sleeper class was unjustified because, as per Rule 2 sub rule A of OM dated 23.09.2008, an employee with a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- was entitled to travel in AC-II class by train.

The OM did not specify sleeper class as an entitlement for the applicant's grade pay, making the restriction unclear and without proper ground.

The court further noted that Sub Rule D of Rule 2 of the OM provided for mileage allowance for road travel by personal conveyances like scooters and did not mention any requirement for prior approval to use such modes.

The respondents also failed to produce any documentary evidence of instructing the applicant to exclusively use public transport.

Regarding food bills, the court determined that Rule 3 of Annexure RJ-1 only set a monetary limit of Rs. 200/- per day for reimbursement and did not specify the types of food items that could be consumed, rendering the rejection of claims based on the 'spirit' of the rules unwarranted and unjustified.

The court directed the respondents to reassess the applicant's claim for TA/DA in light of the observations made in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the order.

Specifically, the respondents were ordered to reimburse the balance amount of TA/DA, including the entire amount previously deducted from the applicant's salary, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

There were no orders as to costs.