Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, A.M. Attar, was a guard in the Central Railway who retired on 28 February 1997. He was allotted railway quarters at Byculla, Mumbai. His son was appointed as a turner in the Central Railway in 1988 and resided with the petitioner with permission. Before retirement, the petitioner and his son applied to transfer the quarter to the son's name. The request was not considered initially, but the son was allotted independent premises of a lower type. The petitioner was allowed to retain the quarter on rent until 30 June 1997 and on medical grounds until 30 October 1997. The Railway Authorities later informed the son that his application for transfer was sanctioned and the quarter was transferred to his name from 30 December 1997. However, the petitioner claimed that the quarter allotted to his son was of a lower type and not equivalent to the one he occupied. The son filed a petition (O.A.) regarding the allotment of lower type premises. The court considered whether the petitioner had a right to have the quarter transferred to his son and whether the son was entitled to the same type of accommodation. The court held that transfer of quarters from a retiring employee to a family member who is also an employee is not a matter of right but is governed by administrative policy and availability. The son cannot claim the same type of accommodation as the father merely because the father occupied it. The court dismissed the petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claim.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Railway Quarters - Transfer of Quarters - Retired Employee - Son's Entitlement - The petitioner, a retired railway guard, sought transfer of his quarter to his son, also a railway employee. The son was allotted a lower type quarter. The court held that transfer of quarters from a retiring employee to a family member who is also an employee is not a matter of right but is governed by administrative policy and availability. The son cannot claim the same type of accommodation as the father merely because the father occupied it. (Paras 1-3) B) Service Law - Railway Quarters - Right to Accommodation - Retired Employee - The petitioner was allowed to retain the quarter on rent and medical grounds for a limited period after retirement. The court held that after retirement, the petitioner has no right to continue in the quarter, and the son's allotment is independent. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a retired railway employee has a right to have the railway quarters transferred to his son who is also a railway employee, and whether the son is entitled to the same type of accommodation as the father.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Transfer of railway quarters from retiring employee to son is not a matter of right
- subject to administrative policy and availability
- no vested right to retain higher type accommodation after retirement
