Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2856 (CHH)

AMRESH YADAV v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/13140/2025 · 2026-01-06

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:833 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 13140 of 2025 1 - Amresh Yadav S/o Baliram Yadav Aged About 35 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 05, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Gourishankar Vishwakarma S/o Baijnath Vishwakarma Aged About 36 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 89, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Umesh Velvanshi S/o Kansu Velvanshi Aged About 39 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 447, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Kishan Lal Tetarwal S/o Banwari Lal Aged About 37 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 573, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Shriram Yadav S/o Buddiram Yadav Aged About 39 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 435, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Ramprakash S/o Shri Sobran Lal Aged About 36 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 293, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Ashish Katare S/o Shri Binod Katare Aged About 36 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 441, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Dharmendra Singh S/o Shri Prahlad Singh Aged About 34 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 339, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 9 - Ashok Yadav S/o Shri Hansraj Yadav Aged About 36 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 399, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 10 - Arbind Turkar S/o Shri Babulal Turkar Aged About 40 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 81, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 11 - Ummed Singh S/o Shri Moti Lal Aged About 36 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 48, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 12 - Sanjay Kumar S/o Shri Suresh Chandra Aged About 33 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 198, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 13 - Lakhan Rahagdale S/o Shri Jaglal Rahagdale Aged About 37 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 440, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 14 - Devendra Singh S/o Shri Badan Singh Aged About 33 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 80, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 15 - Arab Singh Parihar S/o Shri Bijendra Singh Aged About 33 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 288, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 16 - Santosh Kumar S/o Shri Narpal Singh Aged About 34 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 06, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 17 - Ramhans S/o Shri Kalicharan Aged About 45 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 1030, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 18 - Pappan Singh S/o Pitai Santoshi Lal Aged About 39 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 88, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 19 - Avinash Kumar Rai S/o Sarv Dev Ram Aged About 35 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 20 - Sunil Singh S/o Keshav Singh Aged About 36 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Constable Batch No. 552, 16th Battalion B/r Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 3 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director General Of Police Police Headquarter Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Commandant 16th Battalion (B/r) Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Company Commander Unit Narayanpur 16th Battalion (B/r) Chhattisgarh Arms Force Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Harshal Chauhan, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 07/01/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :- “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 22.05.2014 (Annexure P-1) issued by the respondent No.3 in respect of petitioners. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners including stopping and recovery of the house allowance. 10.3 Any other relief, which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners are employees of Police Department and they are entitled for government accommodation as per entitlement, however, as the government accommodation are not vacant, petitioners were required to live in a rented accommodation, against which, they have claimed house rent allowance according to service rules applicable to them. He contended 4 that however, subsequently based on the audit objections, recovery notice was issued. The letter was written by the Commandant to Company Commander directing for recovery of house rent availed by petitioners. Learned counsel for petitioners would submit that though the order is dated 22.05.2024. He also contended that some other employees have filed writ petition before this Court bearing WPS No.3432 of 2014, which was allowed and letter dated 22.05.2014 has been quashed. Case of petitioners is squarely covered with order passed in WPS No.3432 of 2014 dated 30.07.2024. 3. Learned State counsel do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for petitioners with regard to case of petitioners to be squarely covered with order passed in WPS No.3432 of 2014. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Petitioners have placed on record the copy of order dated 30.07.2024, passed in WPS No.3432 of 2014 as Annexure P-7. Relevant portion of the order is extracted below for ready reference :- “2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were initially appointed as Constables in the Police Department and were posted in the Naxal-affected areas. He further submitted that vide order dated 30.10.2004 respondent No. 1 issued a Circular and granted HRA @ 7% of basic salary to the Police employees who were posted in the Naxal- affected areas. He also submitted that vide order dated 22.05.2014, an order of recovery of HRA was issued by respondent No. 3 on the ground that the petitioners are not the residents of the State of Chhattisgarh, therefore they are not entitled to get 5 HRA. He further argued that the order passed by respondent No. 3 is arbitrary, discriminatory, mala-fide and therefore, deserves to be quashed. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State would oppose. She submitted that the petitioners had submitted a declaration before the authorities to the effect that if any of the information is found false, the benefit may be withdrawn. She further submitted that the petitioners belong to other States; therefore, they are not entitled to get HRA in the State of Chhattisgarh. She referred to the Circulars dated 19.04.2005, 05.09.2006 and 22.02.2010 in this regard. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. Admittedly, the petitioners are Police Constables. At the relevant time, they were posted in the Naxal- affected areas. As a sufficient number of government accommodations were not available, the petitioners stayed in rented houses. A Circular was issued by the State Government on 30.10.2007, according to which the Police officials who are staying in rented houses would be entitled to get HRA. The petitioners were granted HRA by the department in the year 2011. This practice continued till 22.05.2014 and on that date, an order of recovery was issued by respondent No. 3. 6. The order granting the benefit of HRA to petitioners and other police officers was issued by the department itself and there was no misrepresentation on the part of petitioners. The benefit was extended according to the existing circulars; though a declaration was submitted by petitioners, in the absence of any rule concerning the submission of a declaration form, it would not be binding upon the petitioners. 6 7. Taking into consideration the fact that (i) the benefit of HRA was extended to the petitioners by the department itself; (ii) there was no misrepresentation on the part of the petitioners; (iii) the petitioners are Class-III employees; and (iv) the order of recovery has been issued after 3 years, therefore it would iniquitous for them to refund the amounts. Thus, the order dated 22.05.2014 (Annexure P/1) pertaining to the petitioners is hereby quashed. 8. If any amount as shown in the order dated 22.05.2014 has already been recovered, the same shall be refunded along with interest @ 8% p.a. to the petitioners within a period of three months from today.” 6. In view of the above submission made by learned counsel for respective parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition stands allowed in terms of order dated 30.07.2024 passed in WPS No.3432 of 2014. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram