1 CGHC010301562021 2026:CGHC:34338 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6468 of 2021 Prof. R.C. Joshi S/o Late Shri R.D. Joshi, Aged About 61 Years Government Kaketya P.G. College, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1- State of Chhattisgarh Through -The Secretary, Finance Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2- The Commissioner Higher Education, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3- The Treasury Officer, Accounts And Treasury, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhttisgarh. 4- The Principal Government Kaketiya P. G. College, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief:- “10.1 To call for the records of the case for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court. 10.2 To issue an appropriate writ or order and declare that the inaction on the part of respondents particularly res.no.3 & 4 is bad in law. 10.3 To issue an appropriate writ or order and direct the respondents to pay compound interest @ 18% Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 per annum on the arrears which was paid to the petitioner after a period of more than 23 years within a stipulated period. 10.4 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. Facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Lecturer (Geology) on 24.01.1980 and his services were confirmed on 04.03.1987. On 19.01.1982, the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh issued instructions for grant of House Rent Allowance (HRA) and Special Allowance to employees posted in Scheduled Areas. Vide memorandum dated 11.01.1984, a detailed instructions was issued regarding grant of HRA and special allowance to the employees posted in scheduled areas. Madhya Pradesh Revision of Pay Rules, 1983 were made effective from 01.04.1981. As per memo dated 11.01.1984, HRA was granted @ 25 % of basic and special allowance @ 20% of basic pay. Later on, petitioner retired from service, thereafter, he submitted representations before the respondent authorities seeking payment of House Rent Allowance, stating therein that he had been posted in Scheduled Areas and was entitled to the benefit of the aforesaid circular. 3. As no action was taken, the petitioner preferred Original Application No. 3259 of 1991 before the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The said Original Application was decided on 11.09.1998, wherein a direction was issued to the concerned authorities to make payment of House Rent Allowance in accordance with Circular dated 11.01.1984 read with the Finance Department instructions dated 19.07.1986 for the period from 01.01.1984 to 31.12.1985, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. It was further observed that if the payment was not made within a period of three months, interest for the entire period would be payable at the rate of 18% per annum; thereafter, the 3 petitioner filed WPS No. 6753 of 2019 seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to comply with the order passed by the Administrative Tribunal. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 03.09.2019. The Coordinate Bench directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner, subject to verification, and to take appropriate steps for granting the relief within a period of four months. 4. It is stated that pursuant to the orders passed in the Original Application in 3259 of 1991 and co-ordinate Bench in WPS No. 6753 of 2019, the respondents made payment of HRA to the petitioner on 31.12.2019 along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. 5. Mr. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Administrative Tribunal had directed the respondent authorities to make payment of HRA within a period of three months, failing which interest at the rate of 18% per annum was payable. Since the respondents have paid interest only at the rate of 12% per annum, a direction may be issued to make payment of the remaining amount of interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose the submission made by counsel for the petitioner and submit that the relief sought in the present petition was not claimed in the earlier round of litigation. He would further submit that the respondents have already paid the HRA amount to the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. He would also submit that the petitioner was posted at Jagdalpur and was not entitled to the benefits claimed; thus, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 8. The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, while deciding Original Application No. 3259 of 1991, passed the following order:- “It is ordered that payment should be made to the petitioners of special allowance and house rent allowance in accordance with the Finance Department's memorandum dt. 4 11.1.1984 read with Finance Department's letter dt.19.7.1986 for the period from 1.1.1984 to 31.12.1985. The petitioners will also be paid interest on the arrears @12% per annum. All this payment should be made to the petitioners within 3 months of the receipt of this order by the respondents. If the payment is not made within the prescribed time limit then the interest has to be paid for the entire period @ 18% per annum. government will be free to recover from the concerned official responsible for delay in payment, the difference in amount on account of the higher rate of interest. It is also clarified that payment of higher rate of interest will not be a defence if any contempt action is brought on the ground that payment has not been made within the stipulated period of 3 months.” 9. It appears that in WPS No. 6753 of 2019, the respondent authorities were directed to comply with the Tribunal’s order within a period of four months. The department made payment of HRA to the petitioner for the relevant period along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. Since the payment was made after expiry of the stipulated period of three months, the respondents were under obligation to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 10.Accordingly, the petition filed by the petitioner is hereby allowed. The respondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the HRA amount already paid to the petitioner. As the respondents have already paid interest at the rate of 12% per annum, the remaining 6% interest shall be paid to the petitioner for the relevant period. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim