Judgment:
By Hon'ble Mr. K. George Joseph, Administrative Member -
1. This Original Application has been filed by the applicant mainly for a direction to the respondents to sanction the TA bill submitted by him and to effect payment within a time frame.
2. The applicant had performed journey by car on 19.1.2009, 3.2.2009, 6.2.2009 and 12.5.2009 while functioning as Defence Assistant in certain departmental inquiries. His TA bills claiming road mileage for the above journeys have been passed restricting the claim to bus fare unilaterally by the second respondent and reducing the actual claim for Rs. 3,458/- to a sum of Rs. 500/- plus. The applicant has not accepted the payment as he felt the rejection of his claim as unjust, arbitrary and against rules and preferred to file this Original Application.
3. The applicant submitted that his TA bills are drawn strictly in accordance with Annexures A-1 and A-2 government orders by which he is entitled to perform journeys in own car and claim mileage as prescribed. The respondents have no authority or power to modify or amend the same rules on their own as per the impugned order at Annexure A-9. In spite of the aforesaid order the applicant has been sanctioned and paid traveling expenses in accordance with his claim for road mileage at approved rates for journey performed by him as defence assistant by his own car by the second respondent himself and subsequently by heads of divisions of SSRM, Trivandrum Division, Senior Superintendent of Post Office, Mavelikara Division and Pathanamthitta Division, without any objection. The second respondent himself has sanctioned TA bills of the presenting officer allowing road mileage in the very same inquiry proceedings wherein the applicant was defence assistant. The applicant has been meted out discriminatory treatment.
4. The respondents have no dispute regarding the entitlement of the applicant for getting taxi fare reimbursed. The TA bill of the applicant was curtailed as a part of economy measures initiated as per directions of the Postal Directorate. The controlling authority has full authority to restrict TA claims put forth by the applicant as per Annexure A-3 order. They also submitted that there has not been any amendment or modification to Annexures A-1 and A-2 orders issued by the government. They also admitted that on some occasions the applicant's claim for taxi fare mileage might have been sanctioned.
5. In the rejoinder the applicant submitted that his entitlement has been arbitrarily curtailed by the second respondent. His TA bills for the journeys made in his own car in the first and second sittings of the very same inquiry held on 17.1.2008 and 5.8.2008 were sanctioned by the second respondent himself without any objection in spite of the existence of Annexure R-2 order.
6. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant Mr. P.C. Sebastian and learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel Mr. Sunil Jacob Jose appearing for the respondents and perused the records.
7. The admitted facts are that the applicant is entitled to get road mileage at the prescribed rate for the journeys made by him in his own car for attending the departmental inquiries as defence assistant and that some of his TA claims have been sanctioned without any curtailment by the second respondent himself. In some other cases Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Pathanamthitta Division, Mavelikara Division and SSRM Trivandrum Division have also sanctioned TA claims for journeys by his own car without any curtailment in spite of various instructions on economy measures issued as Annexures R-2 and R-4. The entitlement of the applicant for road mileage is as per government orders under SR 154. This being a statutory rule instructions issued by the respondents cannot override the same and take away the entitlement of the applicant.
8. Further the instructions regarding economy measures issued by the Government of India are applicable uniformly all over the Country. From the facts of the case it is observed that instructions regarding economy measures are not uniformly implemented in all Postal Divisions under the respondents. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Pathanamthitta and Mavelikara Divisions and SSRM Trivandrum Division or even for that matter the second respondent himself have sanctioned TA bills of the applicant without any curtailment in spite of the economy measures. Further the second respondent himself has sanctioned TA bills of the presenting officer allowing road mileage in the very same inquiry proceedings wherein the applicant was a defence assistant. The pick and choose policy adopted by the respondents in implementing certain instructions regarding economy measures to the detriment of the entitlement of the applicant is discriminatory and arbitrary.
9. The applicant was never informed about the intention of the respondents to limit certain type of TA claims to bus fare. Had the applicant been informed he could have either travelled by bus or train as the case may be or he would not have incurred the expenditure for travelling in his own car for performing his function as defence assistant in departmental proceedings. It is arbitrary on the part of the respondents to curtail the TA claims of the applicant after he has performed journey by car to bus fare. The respondents have authority to impose economy measures. This authority has to be exercised in a transparent, objective and impartial manner and in accordance with statutory rules and not arbitrarily or whimsically. The respondents have exercised their authority arbitrarily and at their will and pleasure without informing the applicant about the economy measures that are to be applied in respect of certain journeys that he might be performing, with retrospective effect. This is clearly illegal.
10. In the result this Original Application is allowed. Annexures A-3, A-8 and A-9 are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to sanction the TA bill amounting to Rs. 3,458/- claimed by the applicant without any curtailment and to effect the payment within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.