Thursday, April 01, 2010

Order to revise house rent rule



Order to revise house rent rule

A husband and a wife who are government employees are both entitled to house rent allowance if one of them is posted a “reasonable distance” away from the other, Calcutta High Court has said.

The government now offers the allowance to either the husband or the wife if the distance between their workplaces is less than 250km.

But the court today ask- ed the government to redraw the house rent allowance policy using a “reasonable dis- tance” instead of 250km as the cut-off.

The matter came up during the hearing of a case moved by a Murshidabad teacher whose husband works for the railways in Calcutta.

Since Shukla Das’s hus-band stays 225km from her school in Kandi, she is not entitled to her house rent allowance, according to the rule that came into effect following a circular issued in October 2007. “She stays in a rented house at Purandarpur but she doesn’t get any rent allowance as her husband is already getting it,” said her lawyer Kaushik Chanda.

Das welcomed the order. “I had repeatedly told the authorities that I deserved the allowance but nothing happened. So, I moved court earlier this month.”

Opposing the petition, government lawyer Kamalesh Jha had said: “Fixing the house rent allowance for government employees is an administrative decision and the court should not interfere in the matter.”

However, Justice Biswanath Somadder said: “As the transport system and infrastructure in our country are not so developed that an employee can travel 450km a day to attend his/her place of work and return home, the government should fix a reasonable distance from home to the workplace if it wants to give house rent to only one of them.”

Before the 2007 circular, all state government employees were entitled to house rent allowance.

“When the government realised that working couples were drawing double house rent but sharing the same accommodation, it adopted the existing policy. But the 250km norm was impractical,” said Chanda.
Source: Telegrahpindia

12 comments:

ABDUL JALEEL said...

some undetakings and authorities consider quarter as fringe benifit and deducting income tax for the quarter in par with private sector and same time depriving HRA to spouse working in govt. department.In short working spouses depriving major part of their salary.If the quarter allotee is transfered the spouse have to go out eventhough he or she has been deprived huge amount.

SURESH said...

West Bengal Government can also consider giving only one salary to a family even if both the spouse are working. It will be a great austerity drive. After all the Government servants (working spouses), even if they loose their private lives and make sacrifices for their kids, they are not at all eligible for a comfortable and better living standards than the one set by the Governments - Funny thing, they want the work standards (not the working standards) to improve. In the present day scenario it is required that both the spouse should work to have a little savings for future, it is pitty that these savings and petty comforts are being targetted by Governments leaving to dust the motivational aspects that actually turns out better productivity of workforce.

ABDUL JALEEL said...

Thank you Suresh.As per service rule employees have to reside within 8 km distance.now HRA is main part of payment.

Anonymous said...

But what about the wife is a govt servent and alloted a govt accomodation and the husaband is a private school employee and denied the HRA by the concerned authorities. Is their any rule against this.

ABDUL JALEEL said...

In private schools if payment is given by govt.for this purpose it will treated as govt.service.As different sectors making their own rules it will make difficulties for working couples.For solution,intervention of confederation leaders essential. Please provide email id of such leaders

house rent said...

@K
I don't agree with you. I think this is fair decision by government. Because husband and wife will live together in the same home then why should they get the different packages. I think it's completely fair policy.

ABDUL JALEEL said...

Dear @K,
Thank you for comending on my opinion.Now both the working spouse were availing HRA if any body of them is not availing govt. accomodation and availing DA.As per existing rule this is in tune with rule even some question on the rule itself.But my question isPU units are treated in par with private sector for the accomodation provided by employer and staff have to pay income tax a big amount as per some calculations as it is treated as fringe benifit.Also he will not get HRA and have to pay maintenance charge as per normal practice.But for depriving HRA to their spouses who are working in govt. department PU units are treated in par with govt.department.Here double standard is applied against working couple.As both are in deffrent sector,If the allotee is transfered the spouse have to vacate even depriving HRA for long time.

Anonymous said...

Husband works in a govt undertaking organisation and avail quarter provided by the organisation and 20% hra is deducted from his salary.His wife works in a govt aided HS school 10 km away from their quarter.Can u tell me whether she can draw HRA or not?

ABDUL JALEEL said...

Sir,
As per traditional hra in this case she is not eligible for hra.But the distances between the work places of both couple is matter and it is to be confirme whether it will come under the definition of"same station".As I indicated in previous post if the accomodation is provided by undertaking he have to pay incometax also as the accomodation provided by undertaking and private sector is treated as perks and which is subjected to incometax.

Anonymous said...

Continuation of the latest post the organisation(WBPDCL)treats the deducted 20% hra as fringe benefit.and workplaces are BKTPP(BIRBHUM) for husband and SURI(BIRBHUM)for wife.Now could u help me to find out the answer(whether wife could get hra?)?

Anonymous said...

I think this rule of only one of a couple getting hra is completely unjust. You both do the same amt of work, making sacrifices at home and so both shd earn equal amt of HRA.You cannot discriminate just because he or she works for the same govt or same organization.I think the court shd interefere in this discrimination as in major cases, women are forgoing their HRA, and bringing home a lesser pay packet for the same amt of work as any other individual.

Anonymous said...

Since both are wife & husband are working for govt. organisations as different individuals/employees, they should get equal pay in all respects as every other employee. If wife is curtailed of some benefits, it is like govt. is enjoying her service and paying less salary. Also, govt. should note that the HRA given by them is actually not meeting the exact requirements to pay complete rent. So both wife & husband are sharing their individual HRA and infact putting remaining balance from their salary. So, keeping in view, since women are sacrificing many aspects for both working at office & home, they should be treated as individual employee and should get all allowances equally irrespective of their spouse income.

LIST OF CGHS HOSPITALS
1. ALLAHABAD 2. AHEMDABAD 3. Bangalore 4. Bhubhaneshwar 5. Bhopal
6. Chandigarh 7. CHENNAI 8. Delhi 9. Dehradun 10. Guwahati
11. Hyderabad 12. Jaipur 13. Jabalpur 14. Kanpur 15. Kolkata
16. Lucknow 17. Meerut 18. Mumbai 19. Nagpur 20. Patna
21. Pune 22. Ranchi 23. Shillong 24. Trivandrum 25. Jammu.
7th CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION NEWS
TITLEDATEARTICLESORDERS
EXPECTED PAY STRUCTURE OF 7TH CPC10.04.201490Paisa
Date of submission of 7th CPC Report05.04.2014-Rajya Sabha
Comments and Suggestions on 7th CPC04.04.201490Paisa
A webpage has been created by the Ministry of Finance for 7th Central Pay Commission24.03.2014-Finmin
Federations veiws on the ToR of 7th CPC05.03.2014AIRF/BPMS/IRTSA
Cabinet approved 7th Central Pay Commission Terms of Reference28.02.201490Paisa
Prime Minister has approved the composition of the 7th Central Pay Commission04.02.201490Paisa
NO COMPROMISE ON TERMS OF REFERENCE07.12.2013NFPE
Possible ToR meeting with Staff Side JCM-Dopt19.11.2013Dopt
7th CPC Date for implementation11.10.20137thcpcnews
Press Statement of Confederation of 7th CPC25.09.2013Confederation
Consent given by PM for 7th CPC25.09.201390Paisa
RETIREMENT AGE 62
HEADLINESDATEOUR BLOGOTHER BLOGSOTHER MEDIAS
Retirement age of 65: The Politicization of Employees’ Demands11.04.201490Paisa--
Retirement age to 62-What is the background behind this news?01.03.201490Paisa--
50% DA Merger and Retirement age almost disappeared from CG Employees Diary...!07.03.2014-GServants-
High hopes fading due to announcement of election dates...05.03.2014-Karnmk-
Proposals of Retirement age 62 and 50% DA Merger..?01.03.2014-GServants-
Retirement Age 62 - Cabinet expected to clear on Friday (28.202014)26.02.201490Paisa--
Retirement Age 62 – Cabinet is likely to clear some of these demands..!25.02.2014-PCUpdate
Proposal for raising Retirement Age to 62 waits for Cabinet Nod17.02.2014-GServants-
Parliamentary panel urged to raise the retirement age to 65 years08.02.2014--TOI
Retirement Age 62 : Govt not considering to raise retirement age to 6218.08.2013-PTI
Retirement age 62 – No hike in Retirement age of Central Government employees…15.08.2013-CGEN.in-
Retirement Age 62 - Prime Minister likely to declare on his Independence Day speech14.08.2013-CGEN.in-
Retirement Age of High Court Judges23.08.201390Paisa--
Retirement Age 62 – Cabinet decision to increase retirement age deferred03.08.2013--B.Standard
No plan to increase retirement age of employees16.06.2013--PTI
Pros and cons of raising the retirement age of Central Government Employees09.06.2013-EOrders-
No decision on central staff retirement age on cabinet meeting05.06.2013-PCUpdate-
Retirement age to be extended by 2 years to 6204.06.2013--FExpress
Increase retirement age of government employees to 6230.05.2013--ET
Union government wants retirement age 6229.05.2013--Rediff
No proposal to enhance the retirement age from 60 to 62 years08.03.201390Paisa--
Call to increase retirement age of bank employees to 6504.02.2013--Hindu
Retirement age of Central Government Employees20.01.201390Paisa--
Retirement age of faculty doctors from 65 to 70 years…03.12.201290Paisa-
Enhancement of superannuation retirement age of KV teachers31.08.201290Paisa-
Retirement age of Teachers and Lecturers26.08.201290Paisa--
Cabinet today approved the proposal to enhancement of age of superannuation of teachers to 6521.07.2012--PIB
Retirement age across the world - ILC Report10.07.2011--Global
Govt employees near retirement should not be disturbed05.09.2010--PTI
PIL on retirement age of civil servants 25.09.2010--PTI

Disclaimer

90 Paisa News : As and when orders amending the rules are published by the Government, the amendment orders will be published in our blog immediately. Readers are requested to refer to the source link is given at the end of the post.

All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy of the content on this blog, the same should not be construed as a statement of law or used for any legal purposes. 90paisa accepts no responsibility in relation to the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or otherwise, of the contents. Users are advised to verify/check any information with the relevant department(s) and/or other source(s), and to obtain any appropriate professional advice before acting on the information provided in the blog.


Links to other websites that have been included on this blog are provided for public convenience only.

90paisa is not responsible for the contents or reliability of linked websites and does not necessarily endorse the view expressed within them. We cannot guarantee the availability of such linked pages at all times.

Any suggestions write to us
90paisa2008@gmail.com


Related Posts with Thumbnails