Page No.# 1/6 GAHC030005232023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/121/2023 Dr. Lalbiaktluangi and 3 Ors. D/o Dr. Malsawma R/o D 30/3, Zarkawt, PWD Tlang, Medical Officer, Central Govt, Health Scheme Wellness Centre, MINECO, Khatla, Aizawl 2: Sh. Anil Kumar S/o Shaitan Bishnoi R/o V/p-Chora Tehsil- Sanchore District-Jalore Rajasthan (343041) Nursing Officer Central Govt. Health Scheme Wellness Centre MINECO Khatla Aizawl 3: Sh. Aman Bhaskar S/o Anwadesh Prasad R/o Village- Taradih P.O- Purnadih P.S- Madanpur Dist- Aurangabad Bihar Pin-824208 Pharmacist Central Govt. Health Scheme Wellness Centre MINECO Khatla Aizawl 4: Dr. Eiphrangdaka L. Suchiang D/o Rancha Lyngdoh R/o 150 Dong Wahshnong Laskein Village Page No.# 2/6 West Jaintia Hills Meghalaya - 793150 Medical Officer (Homeopathy) Central Govt. Health Scheme Wellness Centre MINECO Khatla Aizaw VERSUS The Union of India and 3 Ors. R/b Secretary to the Govt. of India, Minsitry of Finance, Dept. of Expenditure, Room No. 76, New Delhi - 110001. 2:The Secretary to the Govt. of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Nirman Bhawan Rajpath Area Central Secretariat New Delhi Delhi 110001 3:AS and DG (Addl. Secretary and Director General) Central Govt. Health Scheme Wellness Centre Room No. 157 A Nirman Bhawan Maulan Azad Road New Delhi- 110011 4:The Additional Director East Zone (CGHS) Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Directorate General of Health Services GMSD Complex A.K. Azad Road Gopinath Nagar Guwahati - 781016 Assa Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte Advocate for the Respondent : Ms Zairemsangpuii, CGC for R1 - 4 Page No.# 3/6 ORDER BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO 07.04.2025 Heard Ms. Valentina Laldinpuii, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Having regard to the nature of grievance projected by the petitioners, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage with the consent of the learned counsels for the rival parties. [2.] It is the case of the petitioners that they are the employees of Central Government who have been posted at the Central Government Health Scheme Wellness Centre at MINECO, Khatla, Aizawl. The petitioners are enjoying House Rent Allowance (HRA) @9% of their basic pay. According to the petitioners, the HRA is refixed from time to time by the Govt. of India and the same is correlated with Dearness Allowance (D.A). The petitioners contend that Govt. of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure vide Office Memorandum dated 07.07.20217 (Annexure - 8) had notified the implementation of recommendation of the 7th Pay Commission relating to grant of HRA to Central Government employees. As per the said Office Memorandum, the petitioners are entitled to receive their HRA @16% of their basic pay with Page No.# 4/6 effect from 14.02.2017 to 30.06.201 and @18% with effect from 01.07.2021 and 31.02.2023. Their HRA will further be enhanced from 18% to 20% with effect from 01.04.2023 till date. It is however their case that their individual entitlement would differ in view of the difference in the post they hold and the date of their respective joining in service. [3.] The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this Court had the occasion to deal with similar and identical issue in the case filed by Sh. Lalchhuanawma Hrahsel & 754 Others i.e., WP(C) No. 14/2021. The writ petitioner was disposed of vide Judgment & Order dated 19.07.2023 by directing the respondents to grant the benefit of the enhanced HRA to the petitioners therein. The said Judgment & Order was put to challenge by the respondent authorities by filing Writ Appeal No. 90/2024 but however, the Writ Appeal was dismissed vide Judgment & Order dated 25.03.2025 and therefore, the instant writ petition being squarely covered by the earlier decision of this Court and which was upheld by the Division Bench, a similar direction may be issued to the respondents to grant the HRA to the petitioners in the enhanced rate. [4.] On 03.04.2025 when this matter was listed, the learned CGC was given some time to examine the order passed in Writ Appeal No. 90/2024. Today, Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC submits that although the Writ Appeal was Page No.# 5/6 dismissed but an observation was made to the effect that if at any point of time the Central Government review its decision on granting HRA applicable to ‘Y’ Class cities to the Central Government employees posted in various departments in the city of Aizawl, other than in case of the employees of Mizoram University and its constituent college, the cases of the beneficiaries of the HRA shall also be guided by the said review exercise. However, until such review exercise is being undertaken, the employees concerned will be entitled to get the HRA in terms of the direction that was already passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition. [5.] Considering the above submissions, it only appears that the case of the instant petitioners are squarely covered by the Judgment & Order of the Division Bench of this Court passed in WP(C) No. 7550/2023 (Union of India & Ors. Vs. Mohan Das & Ors.), which upheld the order dated 02.05.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in O.A No. 231/2019 and also the Judgment & Order dated 25.03.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A No. 90/2024 by which the Judgment & Order passed by this Court on 19.07.2023 in WP(C) No. 14/2021 was upheld. [6.] In the result, the petitioners are found to be entitled to be granted their respective HRA on the basis of HRA calculated for ‘Y’ Class cities in terms of the Page No.# 6/6 recommendation of the 7th Central Pay Commission, which was notified vide Office Memorandum dated 07.07.2017. The respondent authorities shall therefore work out the amount entitled to each of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible and thereafter grant them the amount which is worked out without delay. The entire exercise be carried out within the outer limit of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. [7.] Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant