Deploring the resistance of government employees,ministers and MPs,and other high dignitaries to vacate the public premises after their retirement or demitting offices,the Supreme Court on Friday issued a slew of guidelines to ensure menace of overstaying is curbed and eligible people get the accommodation timely.
A Bench of Justices P Sathasivam and Ranjan Gogoi laid down a set of 20 guidelines,detailing the procedure to be followed for different classes of people overstaying in government accommodation,and asked the central,state and Union Territory governments to follow them.
Prescribing a time-frame for vacation of premises,the court said that judges of any forum shall vacate the official residence within a period of one month from the date of superannuation or retirement and this period could be extended by another month after recording sufficient reasons.
Since allotment of government accommodation is a privilege given to the ministers and MPs,the matter of unauthorised retention should be intimated to the Speaker or Chairman of the House and action should be initiated by the House Committee for the breach of the privileges which a Member/Minister enjoys. Appropriate Committee should recommend to the Speaker/Chairman for taking appropriate action/eviction within a time-bound period, it said,accepting the suggestion by amicus curiae and senior advocate Ranjit Kumar.
The Bench added that no memorials should be allowed in any government houses. Laying down a detailed mechanism,the court said the Director of Estates shall issue a notice three months prior to his retirement and the employer-department will be liable to serve it.
Order of eviction,the court said,should be passed preferably within a period of 15 days after the allottees has been given an opportunity of being heard. For any extension of stay,the employer-department will need to issue a genuineness certificate and in no case,more than two months can be granted. As per the existing rules,a government employee is given at least eight months to vacate.
There must be a provision for compound interest,instead of simple interest (for overstaying). To make it more stringent,there must be some provision for stoppage or reduction in the monthly pension till the date of vacation of the premises, said the court.
Unauthorised occupants must appreciate that their act of overstaying in the premises directly infringes the right of another. No law or directions can entirely control this act of disobedience but for the self realisation among the unauthorised occupants, it remarked.
The order came on an appeal by a Karnataka government employee against an order to evict a government quarters. Subsequently,SC converted it into a PIL and issued notices to the Centre and state governments.