Employees transferred to CPDL cannot have accommodation applications excluded solely on account of their transfer.

The applicants, employees originally appointed in the Electricity Department, sought allotment or change of Government accommodation in the Electricity Pool after applications were invited on 11 March 2026.

Their applications were not considered on the stated ground that they had been transferred to Chandigarh Power Distribution Limited (CPDL) under the Chandigarh Electricity Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2025.

Meanwhile, Houses were allotted to employees of other wings of the Engineering Department through Office Orders Nos. 601 and 602, dated 27 and 30 March 2026.

The applicants challenged those orders, contending that the accommodation remained with the Chandigarh Administration and that their applications could not be excluded solely because of the transfer, which was itself under challenge in separate proceedings.

The Tribunal had initially stayed the effect of the impugned orders; the High Court had earlier kept a status quo order in the transfer litigation in abeyance but permitted parties to seek relief if prejudice arose during its pendency.

1. Whether the applicants’ applications for Government accommodation could be excluded from consideration solely because they had been transferred to CPDL, despite the accommodation remaining with the Administration and the applicable accommodation rules continuing to govern existing occupants.

2. Whether the impugned allotment orders could stand where the applicants’ applications had not been shown to have been considered on their individual merits under the applicable eligibility criteria.

The proceedings were brought under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

The Tribunal applied the governing principle that an application for public accommodation must be considered under the applicable rules and eligibility criteria, and that administrative discretion in allotment does not dispense with such consideration.

It also considered the relevant provisions of the Chandigarh Electricity Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2025, including the protection of transferred employees’ service conditions and the continued application of accommodation rules to employees permitted to retain Government accommodation.

No judicial precedent was relied upon.

The Tribunal found that the residential quarters had not been transferred to CPDL and remained under the Administration’s control; moreover, employees transferred to CPDL who already occupied Government accommodation were permitted to retain it subject to applicable conditions and rules.

The respondents identified no rule expressly barring transferred employees from having fresh-allotment or change applications considered.

Nor did merely placing the applications before the House Allotment Committee establish that the applicants’ individual claims had been assessed on relevant criteria.

Since other employees received allotments while the applicants’ claims were not considered on their merits, the Tribunal found procedural non-consideration.

It left individual eligibility and ultimate entitlement to the competent authority.

Respondents 1–4 were directed to reconsider the applicants’ applications under the applicable accommodation rules, instructions and Transfer Scheme, without excluding them merely because they had been transferred to CPDL.

The competent authority must issue a reasoned order addressing the applicants’ individual eligibility and entitlement and, as required, reconsider the eligibility and entitlement of persons allotted accommodation under the impugned orders.

The exercise was to be completed expeditiously, preferably within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

The Tribunal expressed no view on entitlement to any particular house or on the validity of the transfer; no costs were awarded.