NEWS: SC says Right to Shelter doesn’t mean Right to Government Accommodation

By Legal Wires 4 Minutes Read

The Supreme Court has held that the Right to shelter under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, does not mean the Right to government accommodation for retired government employees.

Union of India vs. Onkar Nath Dhar

A Division Bench of Justice Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna opined that “A right to shelter is a fundamental right, that may not be disputed, but such a right of shelter is granted to millions of Indians who do not have shelter. A section of society, more so retired government employees, who had earned pension, drawn retirement benefits cannot be said to be in such condition, where the government should provide government accommodation for an unlimited period,“

The case was an appeal filed by the Central Government against an order passed by the Division Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court allowing the respondent, a retired employee of Intelligence Bureau, to retain the government accommodation at a nominal fee until the distressing circumstances in his native state J&K improved.

The counsels for Central Government and the respondent relied on various judgements of the Supreme Court and the High Courts.

The Bench viewed that government accommodation cannot be provided to the person who has demitted the office.

“The compassion could be shown for accommodating the displaced persons for one or two months but to allow them to retain the Government accommodation already allotted or to allot an alternative accommodation that too with a nominal licence fee defeats the very purpose of the Government accommodation which is meant for serving officers,” the Court said.

The Bench noted that Punjab & Haryana High Court passed the direction for accommodation under Article 142 of the Constitution, to which Supreme Court observed that such direction under Article 142 of the constitution allowing retirees to retain possession of accommodation cannot be treated as a binding precedent.

“Law declared by this Court is binding under Article 141. Any direction given on special facts, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142, is not a binding precedent.” the court said.

Therefore, the Court held that the orders passed by the Punjab & Haryana and Delhi High Courts were wholly arbitrary and irrational. Hence the Central Government was directed to submit report regarding retired government officials who continue to live in government accommodation by the High Court orders.

Click HERE to Read Judgment

Legal Wires

Team @LegalWires