HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 11847 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. Heard Sri Hanumant Lal Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and the Standing counsel for the respondents. 1. It has been submitted that the petitioner was working on the post of Driver with Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi and during his discharge of the said duties he was allotted government accommodation bearing Awas No.59E, Sthit Koyalbagh Colony, Hardoi. It is further submitted that the petitioner has superannuated from service on 30.1.2025 but till date he is continuing to occupy the official government accommodation allotted to him. It has been stated that he has two children. The daughter is studying in class 12th in Sri Beni Madhav Vidyapeeth Balika Inter College, Hardoi and son is studying in Rafi Ahmad Kidwai Inter College, Hardoi and seeks prayer that he may be permitted to retain the said accommodation till the Board examinations are over. It is further submitted that the petitioner has also given a representation to District Magistrate, Hardoi but the said representation has been rejected on 21.9.2025 and the order passed by District Magistrate has been assailed in the present writ petition. 2. While rejecting the representation District Magistrate has considered the fact that initially as per the government order dated 25.4.1978 it was provided that a government servant would be allowed to retain 3. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hanumant Lal Yadav, Maneesh Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Prem Chandra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Law Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) his official accommodation for a period of six months subsequent to his superannuation but the said retention period came to be reduced by means of government order date 25.2.2019 to a maximum period of one month. He has further taken into consideration the fact that despite superannuation from service in January, 2025 the petitioner has illegally occupied the said accommodation for a period of eight months and in the meanwhile there is requirement of the said government accommodation as the same has already been allotted to another incumbent who is working in District Court, Hardoi. Accordingly for the aforesaid reasons he has rejected the representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated his arguments with regard to his claim that his children are studying and would be appearing in Board Examinations in March/April, 2026 and till such time he should be allowed to retain the said accommodation. 4. The petition has been vehemently opposed by learned Standing Counsel who submits that there is no provision for retention of the government accommodation beyond the period of one month as per the Government Order dated 25.2.2019. Apart from the above, he submits that it was the duty of the petitioner to have voluntarily vacated the said premises within one month after his superannuation but without there being any order or any rule for retention he is continuing with the illegal occupation of the said premises beyond the period prescribed i.e. for a period of eight months. Accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Having heard rival contentions and perusing the record, it is clear that there is no rule which may permit the petitioner to retain the government accommodation for such long period of time and as per the government order the petitioner could have retained the premises for a period of one month only beyond which time he is continuing with illegal occupation of the accommodation. Considering that the District Magistrate has passed a detailed order taking into account the grounds taken by the petitioner and also that the said 6. WRIA No. 11847 of 2025 2 accommodation already stood allotted to another government servant for efficient discharge of his official duties for which such accommodation is allotted, this Court does not find any merit in the claim of the petitioner. It is further found that there is no averment that during the period of illegal occupation of the accommodation the petitioner has paid any penal rent or house rent as per law and accordingly no ground for interference is made out. The petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. At this stage, the petitioner submits that he is himself willing to vacate the said accommodation within a period of seven days. Accordingly, it is provided that for a period of seven days no coercive action shall be taken against him. 7. It is made clear that after expiry of seven days the respondents are directed to proceed in accordance with law and obtain vacant possession of the premises in question from the petitioner. 8. September 26, 2025 RKM. WRIA No. 11847 of 2025 3 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench