CWP-869-2016 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (223) K.S. Ghuman State of Punjab CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI CM-12244- withdraw the instant application for impleadment. CWP-869-2016 1. Rs.26,30,111/ petitioner, on account of his over stay on the government residential h allotted to him in Ludhiana city 2. Constitution of India, (Annexure P 2016 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH K.S. Ghuman Versus State of Punjab and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate and Mr. Sahaj Punj, Advocate for the applicant in CM-12244- **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(ORAL) -CWP-2016 Learned counsel for the applicant/intervenor, seeks permission to withdraw the instant application for impleadment. Dismissed as withdrawn. 2016 The petitioner was served with a notice to pay the penal rent of Rs.26,30,111/-, along with interest. This penal rent was imposed upon the petitioner, on account of his over stay on the government residential h allotted to him in Ludhiana city, for the period By filing the instant petition, cast under Articles Constitution of India, a prayer is made to set aside the orders dated 08.12.2005 (Annexure P-5), 28.05.2008 (Annexure P-13), 22.07.2013 (Annexure P 2016 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-869-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision : 19.08.2025 …Petitioner Versus ...Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Advocate with for the petitioner. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. Advocate and -CWP-2016. Learned counsel for the applicant/intervenor, seeks permission to withdraw the instant application for impleadment. The petitioner was served with a notice to pay the penal rent of , along with interest. This penal rent was imposed upon the petitioner, on account of his over stay on the government residential house, , for the period 24.04.2004 to 31.12.2005. , cast under Articles 226/227 of the a prayer is made to set aside the orders dated 08.12.2005 13), 22.07.2013 (Annexure P-22), Learned counsel for the applicant/intervenor, seeks permission to The petitioner was served with a notice to pay the penal rent of , along with interest. This penal rent was imposed upon the ouse, of the a prayer is made to set aside the orders dated 08.12.2005 22), MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-869-2016 (O&M) 17.12.2013 (Annexure P (Annexure P 3. orders (supra) was transferred government house i been considered by the competent authorities concerned, while imposing the penal rent. 4. learned senior counsel for the petitioner, upon the necessary facts, concerned. 5. Punjab Home Guards, Ludhiana, in the month of May, 1997 Govt. House No.79/B, Rakh Bagh, at city Ludhiana, vide al dated 05.06.1997 (Annexure P Battalion Commandant, Mohali, vide order dated 30.01.2004 (Annexure P Upon his promotion, he work at District Commandant, Ludhiana. 6. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Divisional Commandant, Patiala, on 7. its administrative order dated 31.01.2005 (Annexure P nature of work district, and consi 2016 (O&M) 17.12.2013 (Annexure P-24), 14.07.2017 (Annexure P (Annexure P-35), wherein, the penal rent was imposed u The main ground, upon which the challenge is thrown to the orders (supra), is that the administrative order, through w was transferred, and posted to different place, entitles him to retain the government house in Ludhiana city as well, and the been considered by the competent authorities concerned, while imposing the Before this Court, embark upon the submissions as made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, it is apt at this stage, to have glimpse upon the necessary facts, qua which there is no dispute between the parties The petitioner was appointed as a District Commandant, in Punjab Home Guards, Ludhiana, in the month of May, 1997 Govt. House No.79/B, Rakh Bagh, at city Ludhiana, vide al dated 05.06.1997 (Annexure P-1). Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Battalion Commandant, Mohali, vide order dated 30.01.2004 (Annexure P Upon his promotion, he was also given an work at District Commandant, Ludhiana. The order of promotion was in fact, given effect on 24.03.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Divisional Commandant, Patiala, on 11.11.2004 (Annexure P Subsequently, the DGP-cum-Commandant General, Punjab, vide its administrative order dated 31.01.2005 (Annexure P nature of work and administrative exigencies i.e. Ludhiana, being a large district, and considering the extra supervision work of Home Guards and Civil 2016 (O&M) 2 24), 14.07.2017 (Annexure P-31), and 27.11.2015 the penal rent was imposed upon the petitioner. , upon which the challenge is thrown to the , is that the administrative order, through which the petitioner and posted to different place, entitles him to retain the as well, and the said orders have never been considered by the competent authorities concerned, while imposing the Before this Court, embark upon the submissions as made by the it is apt at this stage, to have glimpse which there is no dispute between the parties The petitioner was appointed as a District Commandant, in Punjab Home Guards, Ludhiana, in the month of May, 1997. He was allotted a Govt. House No.79/B, Rakh Bagh, at city Ludhiana, vide allotment letter Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Battalion Commandant, Mohali, vide order dated 30.01.2004 (Annexure P- additional charge to supervise the The order of promotion was in fact, given effect on 24.03.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Divisional 11.2004 (Annexure P-3). Commandant General, Punjab, vide its administrative order dated 31.01.2005 (Annexure P-4), considering the and administrative exigencies i.e. Ludhiana, being a large dering the extra supervision work of Home Guards and Civil 31), and 27.11.2015 , upon which the challenge is thrown to the ich the petitioner and posted to different place, entitles him to retain the orders have never been considered by the competent authorities concerned, while imposing the Before this Court, embark upon the submissions as made by the it is apt at this stage, to have glimpse which there is no dispute between the parties The petitioner was appointed as a District Commandant, in allotted a lotment letter Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of -2). additional charge to supervise the The order of promotion was in fact, given effect on 24.03.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Divisional Commandant General, Punjab, vide 4), considering the and administrative exigencies i.e. Ludhiana, being a large dering the extra supervision work of Home Guards and Civil MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-869-2016 (O&M) Defense work, as required, a special permission was granted to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. This permission, was however, subject to the condition that the petitioner would not be entit allowance. Meanwhile, vide order dated 08.12.2005 (Annexure P demand of penal rent was served upon the petitioner, wherethrough, the petitioner was asked to deposit Rs.33,22,677/ was imposed upon the petitioner, propelled him to file a detailed representation before the Chief Secretary, The said representation was marked to the Deputy Commissioner concerned, who after considering the facts regularized some of the period default is extracted in tabulated form as under : Sr. No. 1. Due to transfer from Ludhiana on 24.03.04 2. children at Ludhiana 8. various authorities, to consider his posting order, which according to the petitioner, entitle him to retain the government house in Ludhiana city. 9. challenge to the impugned orders (supra), would submit that Commandant General, Punjab Home Guards, and Director, Civil Defense, Punjab, vide its recommendation dated 21.10.2013, made to the Department of Home, has sp regularized, on account of the fact that the petitioner was given permission to make camp office at Ludhiana, for official work. 2016 (O&M) Defense work, as required, a special permission was granted to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. This permission, was however, subject to the condition that the petitioner would not be entit allowance. The petitioner has retained the house uptill Meanwhile, vide order dated 08.12.2005 (Annexure P demand of penal rent was served upon the petitioner, wherethrough, the petitioner was asked to deposit Rs.33,22,677/ was imposed upon the petitioner, propelled him to file a detailed representation before the Chief Secretary, The said representation was marked to the Deputy Commissioner concerned, who after considering the facts regularized some of the period default is extracted in tabulated form as under :- Reason Rule Due to transfer from Ludhiana on 24.03.04 At normal rent under 10(2) Due to study of children at Ludhiana At double normal rent under 10(5) Thereafter, the petitioner again made a detailed representation to various authorities, to consider his posting order, which according to the petitioner, entitle him to retain the government house in Ludhiana city. Learned senior counsel for the peti challenge to the impugned orders (supra), would submit that Commandant General, Punjab Home Guards, and Director, Civil Defense, Punjab, vide its recommendation dated 21.10.2013, made to the Department of Home, has specifically recommended that the period of default is to be regularized, on account of the fact that the petitioner was given permission to make camp office at Ludhiana, for official work. 2016 (O&M) 3 Defense work, as required, a special permission was granted to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. This permission, was however, subject to the condition that the petitioner would not be entitle for any additional oner has retained the house uptill 31.12.2005 Meanwhile, vide order dated 08.12.2005 (Annexure P-5), first notice qua demand of penal rent was served upon the petitioner, wherethrough, the petitioner was asked to deposit Rs.33,22,677/-. This huge penal rent, which was imposed upon the petitioner, propelled him to file a detailed representation before the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Punjab, on 06.09.2006. The said representation was marked to the Deputy Commissioner concerned, who after considering the facts regularized some of the period default, which Rule Time Period At normal rent under 10(2) From 25.03.04 to 24.05.04 At double normal rent under 10(5) 4 months (from 25.05.04 to 24.09.04). Thereafter, the petitioner again made a detailed representation to various authorities, to consider his posting order, which according to the petitioner, entitle him to retain the government house in Ludhiana city. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, in an attempt to throw challenge to the impugned orders (supra), would submit that DGP-cum Commandant General, Punjab Home Guards, and Director, Civil Defense, Punjab, vide its recommendation dated 21.10.2013, made to the Department of ecifically recommended that the period of default is to be regularized, on account of the fact that the petitioner was given permission to make camp office at Ludhiana, for official work. However, this Defense work, as required, a special permission was granted to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. This permission, was however, subject to le for any additional 31.12.2005. qua demand of penal rent was served upon the petitioner, wherethrough, the . This huge penal rent, which was imposed upon the petitioner, propelled him to file a detailed Govt. of Punjab, on 06.09.2006. The said representation was marked to the Deputy Commissioner concerned, , which From 25.03.04 to 4 months (from 25.05.04 to 24.09.04). Thereafter, the petitioner again made a detailed representation to various authorities, to consider his posting order, which according to the tioner, in an attempt to throw cum- Commandant General, Punjab Home Guards, and Director, Civil Defense, Punjab, vide its recommendation dated 21.10.2013, made to the Department of ecifically recommended that the period of default is to be regularized, on account of the fact that the petitioner was given permission to However, this MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-869-2016 (O&M) recommendation entitlement of the petitioner to retain the allotted government house at Ludhiana, has never been considered petitioner, to pay the penal rent of Rs.33,22,67 fastened. 10. Advocate General, Punjab, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. required to pay the penal rent, in terms of Rule 19 of the Punjab Government Houses (General Pool) Allotment Rules, 1983. He further draws the attention of this Court, towards the Annexure R the Executive Enginee the respondent/State, is the basis to calculate the penal rent, and therefore, the petitioner cannot run from his liability to pay, merely, on the ground, that his representation has not been considered. by the Chief Secretary, was passed, in terms of the directions issued by this Court, in CWP-21796 requiring any interference of this Court. 11. made by learned co paper book of the instant petition. 12. wherethrough, at the time of promotion, the petitioner was also given the additional charge to supervise the work as District Commandan Home Guards, Ludhiana, is relevant for adjudication 2016 (O&M) recommendation, and the order of posting and promotions, which establish the entitlement of the petitioner to retain the allotted government house at Ludhiana, has never been considered, and whereas, the liability petitioner, to pay the penal rent of Rs.33,22,67 On the other hand, Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, has vociferously opposed the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. required to pay the penal rent, in terms of Rule 19 of the Punjab Government Houses (General Pool) Allotment Rules, 1983. He further draws the attention of this Court, towards the Annexure R-2, which is the market rent, the Executive Engineer, Provisional Division Ludhiana, which according to the respondent/State, is the basis to calculate the penal rent, and therefore, the petitioner cannot run from his liability to pay, merely, on the ground, that his representation has not been considered. He Chief Secretary, Govt. of Punjab, is a self speaking order, and the same was passed, in terms of the directions issued by this Court, in 21796-2010, and there is no perversity or illegal requiring any interference of this Court. This Court has given due consideration to the submissions, as made by learned counsel for the parties concerned, and has also perused the paper book of the instant petition. The relevant posting order is of 30.01.2004 (Annexure P wherethrough, at the time of promotion, the petitioner was also given the additional charge to supervise the work as District Commandan Home Guards, Ludhiana, is relevant for adjudication 2016 (O&M) 4 and the order of posting and promotions, which establish the entitlement of the petitioner to retain the allotted government house at , and whereas, the liability upon the petitioner, to pay the penal rent of Rs.33,22,677/-, has erroneously been On the other hand, Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, learned Assistant has vociferously opposed the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. He submitted that the petitioner required to pay the penal rent, in terms of Rule 19 of the Punjab Government Houses (General Pool) Allotment Rules, 1983. He further draws the attention 2, which is the market rent, as fixed by r, Provisional Division Ludhiana, which according to the respondent/State, is the basis to calculate the penal rent, and therefore, the petitioner cannot run from his liability to pay, merely, on the ground, that his He also submits that the order passed is a self speaking order, and the same was passed, in terms of the directions issued by this Court, in 2010, and there is no perversity or illegality in the said order, This Court has given due consideration to the submissions, as unsel for the parties concerned, and has also perused the The relevant posting order is of 30.01.2004 (Annexure P- wherethrough, at the time of promotion, the petitioner was also given the additional charge to supervise the work as District Commandant, Punjab Home Guards, Ludhiana, is relevant for adjudication of the instant matter. The and the order of posting and promotions, which establish the entitlement of the petitioner to retain the allotted government house at upon the , has erroneously been On the other hand, Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, learned Assistant has vociferously opposed the submissions made by He submitted that the petitioner is required to pay the penal rent, in terms of Rule 19 of the Punjab Government Houses (General Pool) Allotment Rules, 1983. He further draws the attention fixed by r, Provisional Division Ludhiana, which according to the respondent/State, is the basis to calculate the penal rent, and therefore, the petitioner cannot run from his liability to pay, merely, on the ground, that his submits that the order passed is a self speaking order, and the same was passed, in terms of the directions issued by this Court, in ity in the said order, This Court has given due consideration to the submissions, as unsel for the parties concerned, and has also perused the -2), wherethrough, at the time of promotion, the petitioner was also given the t, Punjab The MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-869-2016 (O&M) relevant part of the promotional order is extracted hereinafter: 13. Commandant, Patiala, it was Divisional Commandant, he was entitled to retain the government house at Ludhiana, since it was a part of the Patiala Division. upon the order dated permission was granted by the DGP the petitioner to establish camp office at Ludhiana. said permission, 14. concerned, i.e. DGP the Department of Home 2016 (O&M) relevant part of the promotional order is extracted hereinafter: “2. After promotion, Sh. Kultaran Singh Ghumman is posted as Commandant, CTI, Mohali against Sh. Tejinder Singh, Dy. Commandant General, who is presently holding the Charge of this post. Besides, he (Sh. Ghumman) will also supervise the present work of Distt. Commander, Punjab Home Guard, Ludhiana.” Further, on promotion to the next cadre as Divisional Commandant, Patiala, it was the case, set up by the petitioner, that being the Divisional Commandant, he was entitled to retain the government house at Ludhiana, since it was a part of the Patiala Division. order dated 31.01.2005 (Annexure P permission was granted by the DGP-cum- the petitioner to establish camp office at Ludhiana. said permission, is reads as under :- “As per domestic compulsions mentioned in your letter, retaining in view complaints received from Govt. of India and Govt. of Punjab about the civil defense work of Dist Ludhiana and Ludhiana being a large district, there is need of supervision of Home Guards & Civil Defense work, you are given permission to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. But no additional allowance will be paid and no additional financial burden on Govt. The efficiency of work of Patiala division shall be kept in view.” After considering all these facts, the competent authority concerned, i.e. DGP-cum-Commandant General, has apprised all these facts to the Department of Home, vide order dated 21.10.2013 (Annexure P 2016 (O&M) 5 relevant part of the promotional order is extracted hereinafter:- After promotion, Sh. Kultaran Singh Ghumman is posted as Commandant, CTI, Mohali against Sh. Tejinder Singh, Dy. Commandant General, who is presently holding the Charge of this post. Besides, he (Sh. Ghumman) will also supervise the present work of Distt. Commander, Punjab Home Guard, Ludhiana.” (emphasis supplied) Further, on promotion to the next cadre as Divisional the case, set up by the petitioner, that being the Divisional Commandant, he was entitled to retain the government house at Ludhiana, since it was a part of the Patiala Division. Much emphasis was laid 31.01.2005 (Annexure P-4), wherethrough, special -Commandant General, Punjab, the petitioner to establish camp office at Ludhiana. The relevant extract of the “As per domestic compulsions mentioned in your aforesaid letter, retaining in view complaints received from Govt. of India and Govt. of Punjab about the civil defense work of Dist Ludhiana and Ludhiana being a large district, there is need of supervision of Home Guards & Civil Defense en permission to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. But no additional allowance will be paid and no additional financial burden on Govt. The efficiency of work of Patiala division shall be kept in (emphasis supplied) ll these facts, the competent authority Commandant General, has apprised all these facts to , vide order dated 21.10.2013 (Annexure P-21), After promotion, Sh. Kultaran Singh Ghumman is posted as Commandant, CTI, Mohali against Sh. Tejinder Singh, Dy. Commandant General, who is presently holding the Charge of this post. Besides, he (Sh. Ghumman) will also supervise the present work of Distt. Commander, (emphasis supplied) Further, on promotion to the next cadre as Divisional the case, set up by the petitioner, that being the Divisional Commandant, he was entitled to retain the government house at was laid hrough, special Commandant General, Punjab, to of the aforesaid letter, retaining in view complaints received from Govt. of India and Govt. of Punjab about the civil defense work of Dist Ludhiana and Ludhiana being a large district, there is need of supervision of Home Guards & Civil Defense en permission to have occasional camp office at Ludhiana. But no additional allowance will be paid and no additional financial burden on Govt. The efficiency of work of Patiala division shall be kept in (emphasis supplied) ll these facts, the competent authority Commandant General, has apprised all these facts to 21), MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-869-2016 (O&M) wherethrough, he categorically observed that the penal rent, which is s be recovered from the petitioner, is dispense with the recovery of hereunder:- 15. the speaking Secretary, Punjab (supra), was Petition No.21796 of 2010, preferred by was working under the petitioner a legal battle became senior to the petitioner. made various complaints, including filing of the instant writ petition, before this Court, and intervenor, been dismissed as withdrawn. This Court has also perused the speaking order passed by the Chief Secretary the considered opinion of imposing the liability of penal rent, upon the petitioner. same has not been considered. 2016 (O&M) wherethrough, he categorically observed that the penal rent, which is s be recovered from the petitioner, is inappropriate, and again with the recovery of the penal rent. The relevant is extracted “The said Govt. house was retained by Sh. K.S. Ghuman, Dy. Commandant General due t compulsive domestic circumstances. Therefore, recovery of penal re4nt from the officer is not appropriate. Therefore, it is again requested to you that penal rent recovery of Rs.26,30,111/-, may be dispensed with. Unfortunately, none of these facts was found speaking order dated 22.07.2013 (Annexure P Secretary, Punjab. It is apposite to mention here that the speaking order was passed upon a mandamusm issu Petition No.21796 of 2010, preferred by one, was working under the petitioner, as a junior officer a legal battle with the petitioner qua the seniority became senior to the petitioner. In his attempt to settle the personal score, he made various complaints, including filing of the instant writ petition, before , and he did not stop there. Even, he filed an application intervenor, bearing CM-12244-CWP-2016. However, the same has already been dismissed as withdrawn. This Court has also perused the speaking order passed by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Punjab the considered opinion of this Court, ought to have been considered, before imposing the liability of penal rent, upon the petitioner. not been considered. 2016 (O&M) 6 wherethrough, he categorically observed that the penal rent, which is sought to appropriate, and again made a request to the penal rent. The relevant is extracted The said Govt. house was retained by Sh. K.S. Ghuman, Dy. Commandant General due to aforesaid official and compulsive domestic circumstances. Therefore, recovery of penal re4nt from the officer is not appropriate. Therefore, it is again requested to you that penal rent recovery of , may be dispensed with.” Unfortunately, none of these facts was found to be considered in dated 22.07.2013 (Annexure P-22), as passed by the Chief . It is apposite to mention here that the speaking order issued by this Court in Civil Writ one, Mr. Daljeet Singh Grewal, who as a junior officer. He stated to have fought the seniority, and subsequently, he In his attempt to settle the personal score, he made various complaints, including filing of the instant writ petition, before e did not stop there. Even, he filed an application . However, the same has already been dismissed as withdrawn. This Court has also perused the speaking order , Govt. of Punjab. All these necessary orders, this Court, ought to have been considered, before imposing the liability of penal rent, upon the petitioner. Unfortunately, the ought to request to the penal rent. The relevant is extracted The said Govt. house was retained by Sh. K.S. Ghuman, o aforesaid official and compulsive domestic circumstances. Therefore, recovery of penal re4nt from the officer is not appropriate. Therefore, it is again requested to you that penal rent recovery of considered in , as passed by the Chief . It is apposite to mention here that the speaking order Writ Mr. Daljeet Singh Grewal, who fought , he In his attempt to settle the personal score, he made various complaints, including filing of the instant writ petition, before e did not stop there. Even, he filed an application of . However, the same has already been dismissed as withdrawn. This Court has also perused the speaking order necessary orders, in this Court, ought to have been considered, before Unfortunately, the MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-869-2016 (O&M) 16. this issue requires af amongst the respondents, i.e the Chief Secretary, Punjab, who after considering the entire above noted facts, shall also consid superannuation, has 17. the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Consequently, the impugned orders (supra), are her with the aforesaid directions. August 19, 2025 Manpreet 2016 (O&M) In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that this issue requires afresh decision by the competent authority concerned, amongst the respondents, i.e the Chief Secretary, Punjab, who after considering the entire above noted facts, shall also consider the fact that the petitioner, superannuation, has now, completed his service period. Let this exercise be carried out within a period of six month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Consequently, the impugned orders (supra), are hereby set aside, and the instant writ petition is with the aforesaid directions. August 19, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2016 (O&M) 7 In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that resh decision by the competent authority concerned, amongst the respondents, i.e the Chief Secretary, Punjab, who after shall re-consider the issue. Further, er the fact that the petitioner, after obtaining the age of service period. Let this exercise be carried out within a period of six month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Consequently, the impugned , and the instant writ petition is disposed of (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that resh decision by the competent authority concerned, amongst the respondents, i.e the Chief Secretary, Punjab, who after consider the issue. Further, er obtaining the age of Let this exercise be carried out within a period of six month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Consequently, the impugned disposed of MANPREET SINGH 2025.08.29 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment