SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures WPSB 94/2019 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sushil Vashistha, Standing Counsel, for the State. Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate, for Uttarakhand Transport Corporation Ltd. (2) Petitioner is serving as Assistant General Manager (Operation) in Uttarakhand Transport Corporation. He has challenged the decision taken by the Corporation to charge ₹2000/- per month for use of the staff car from its officers. Petitioner has challenged the decision on two grounds, firstly, that the amount of ₹2000/- fixed for use of staff car is without any rational and, secondly, that the revised rate for use of staff car has been made applicable retrospectively w.e.f. 1.5.2017, whereas earlier the officers of the Corporation were liable to pay only ₹500/- per month for use of staff car. (3) We are not impressed by the first ground of challenge. Staff car is provided to officers of the Corporation with driver and cost of fuel is also borne by the Corporation, therefore the amount of ₹2000/- per month, fixed for use of staff car, cannot be said to be excessive nor it can be said to be without any rational. However, the retrospective effect given to the decision taken by the Corporation does not appear to be justified. Since the decision was taken by the Headquarters of the Corporation only on 14.1.2019, therefore, revision of the charge retrospectively from 1.5.2017 is unsustainable, as it denies the officers the freedom of choice to use or not to use the staff car. Such a decision can only be prospective so that an officer may discontinue use of staff car who finds the charge to be excessive. However, in case the rates are revised retrospectively, that choice is not available to the officers. (4) In such view of the matter, the retrospectivity given to the impugned decision is unsustainable. Therefore, while we uphold the decision taken by the Corporation to revise the charge for use of staff car, we dispose of the writ petition making it clear that revised charge shall be payable, qua the petitioner, only w.e.f. 14.1.2019 and not from an anterior date, as indicated in the impugned order. (Ashish Naithani, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 20.3.2025 Pr