Three-Year Limit On Retaining Government Quarters For CAPF Personnel In Non-Family Stations Not Arbitrary: Delhi High Court Upholds Rule 43 CGGPRA Rules
The Court said the limitation on retention of government accommodation by CAPF personnel is not whimsical, and reflects a balanced policy decision in light of housing shortage and competing administrative needs.
The Delhi High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 43 of the Central Government General Pool Residential Accommodation (CGGPRA) Rules, 2017, which restricts Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) personnel posted in Non-Family Stations from retaining their allotted government quarters for more than three years. Dismissing a batch of petitions, the Court ruled that the rule is neither arbitrary nor violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur observed, “We are of the considered view that the Rule 43 of the CGGPRA Rules cannot be held to be arbitrary or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as the same has been framed upon due consideration of all relevant factors. The imposition of a three-year cap on retention of accommodation does not appear to be either whimsical or fanciful so as to invite the vice of arbitrariness.”
Advocate Dr. S.S. Hooda appeared for the Petitioners, while Advocate Farman Ali represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Petitioners were serving officers and personnel of various CAPFs, including the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), and others, who had been posted to designated Non-Family Stations across regions such as Jammu & Kashmir, the North-East, and Left-Wing Extremism (LWE) affected areas.
Prior to the 2017 Rules, several government communications, including Office Memoranda issued by the Directorate of Estates and the Ministry of Home Affairs, had allowed CAPF personnel to retain their General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) for the full duration of their Non-Family Station posting, or at least till the end of the academic session of their children. In some cases, retention was granted for as long as 7 years.
However, Rule 43 of the CGGPRA Rules, 2017, introduced a fixed outer limit of three years for such retention. The Petitioners contended that this was a regressive change, discriminatory when compared with Armed Forces personnel who enjoyed more flexible policies, and violative of their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21.
The Petitioners further relied on communications from 2018–2020, including one by the then Home Minister, requesting the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs to revisit the restriction. Despite these, no amendment to the Rules was brought in.
The Petitioners argued that the three-year cap imposed a disproportionate hardship on their families, particularly on the education of children, and failed to consider the continuing nature of postings in hostile and disturbed regions.
Reasoning of the Court
The Court noted that policy decisions such as accommodation allotment fall within the domain of the executive and are not to be interfered with unless found to be patently arbitrary or unconstitutional. “It is settled law that the scope of judicial review in matters involving policy decisions is limited… This Court does not sit in appeal over the wisdom of such decisions and cannot substitute its own views merely because another policy may appear more reasonable or fair”, it stated.
The Court noted that the three-year cap had been introduced after due consultation and reflected a balance between individual hardship and public interest, stating, “The petitioners’ continued retention of GPRA accommodation beyond three years would be at the cost of depriving others in the queue, which would be manifestly unfair in light of limited availability of housing stock.”
The Court rejected the comparison with defence personnel, observing that both are governed by separate rules and policies that account for differing operational structures.
The Bench observed that CAPF personnel who vacate GPRA accommodation after three years are eligible for enhanced House Rent Allowance (HRA), which provides an alternate measure of support. “It is not the case of the petitioners that they are being rendered completely homeless. Government support continues by way of enhanced HRA”, it added.
While upholding Rule 43, the Court clarified that individual hardship cases may be considered under Rule 83, which allows for relaxation in special circumstances.
The Court explained, “If the petitioners, on individual basis, make out some special circumstances, they are at liberty to approach the Competent Authority for due consideration of their specific case, in accordance with the applicable rules and policies.”
Accordingly, all petitions were dismissed.
Cause Title: Inspector (Min) Gajendra Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:5076-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates Dr. S.S. Hooda, Aayushman Aeron, Ankur Chhibber, Anshuman Mehrotra, Sanjay K. Shandilya, Naushad Alam, Arvind Kumar Shukla, Nihal Ahmad, Surbhi Khanna, Susmita Devi, Sanskar Krishnan, Neena Shukla, B.N. Dubey, Mahendra Kumawat, Kulbhushan Arora, Nikunj Arora
Respondents: Advocates Farman Ali, Usha Jamnal, Manisha Agarwal Narain, Yash Tyagi, Chandan Deep Singh, Sandeep Singh Somania, Akhil Gupta, Sandeep Kr. Mahapatra, Tribhuvan, Ishaan, Gagan Kumar, Ratan Prakash, Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, Harshita Chaturvedi, Subhash Tanwar, Sandeep Mishra, Naveen, Bhavi Garg, Vivek Nagar, Kameshwar Nath Mishra, Anubhav Tyagi, Vidya Mishra, Premtosh K. Mishra, Manish Vashist, Sanya Kalsi, Utkarsh Singh, Pavan Narang, Himanshu Sethi, Aishwarya Chhabra, Vikrant N. Goyal, Ankit Prasad, Ravindra Vikram Singh, Aditya Shukla, Virender Pratap Singh Charak, Shubhra Parashar, Jitendra Tripathi, Vinayak Sharma, Arti Bansal, Shruti Goel, Suniti Singh, Kamal Digpaul, Akankshan, Vedansh Anand, T.P. Singh, Vinay Yadav, Abhinav M. Goel, Divyanshu Sinha, Arsh Kalra, Kamna Behrani, Vijay Joshi, Chiranjiv Kumar, Mukesh Sachdeva, Neelima, Avnish Singh, Kapil, Vishal K., Yadav, Kanchan Kumari, Rajesh Gogna, Nipun Jain, Vivek Goyal, CGSC, Gokul Sharma, Syed Abdul Haseeb, Hilaq Haider, Butul Khan, Aakash Meena, Anshuman, Vidhi, Akanksha Jagra, Sahib Gurdeep Singh, Piyush Ahluwalia, Kanav Vir Singh, Deepak Tanwar, Rajdev Kumar, Vatsal Joshi, Nidhi Raman, Rashi Kapoor, Umang Chopra, Karan Malhotra, Virender Pratap Singh Charak, Shivangi Rajawat, Chetan Jadon, Ashish K. Dixit, Shivam Tiwari, Urmila Sharma, Deepika Kalra, Venni Kakkar, Deepak Tanwar, Rajdev Kumar, Archana Gaur, Ridhima Gaur, Ring Baaliyan, Kautilya Birat, Pratimam N. Lakra, Pinky Pawar, Chandan Prajapati, Anubha Bhardwaj, Niyati Sharma, T. Imlinaro Jamir, Nishant Gautam, Sanjana Mehrotra, Arindam Sarin, Arun Dhiman, Theepa Murugesan, Akshay Amritanshu, Swati Mishra, Drishti Saraf, Pragya Upadhyay, Jatin Singh, Keshav Seghal, Shivam Gaur, Kshitij Joshi, Aryan Kumar, Nandita Sharma, Neeraj, Vedansh Anand, Sachin Saraswat, Amit Tiwari, A. Srivastava, A. Tanwar, Arunima Dwivedi, Pinky Pawar, Kritika Sharma, Swati, Piyush Beriwal, Sandip Munjan, Jyotsna Vyas, Ansugman, Rajdev Kumar, Anesweta Sahoo, Rajesh Gogna, Nishant Sharma, Subhra Parasar, Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Gopesh Jindal, Ripudaman Bhardwaj, Kushagra Kumar, Abhinav Bhardwaj, Amit Kumar Rana, Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, Gurleen Kaur Waraich, Kritarth Upadhyay, Devender Singh
