The Himachal Pradesh High Court has strongly criticized the state government's system for allotting residential accommodation to employees, calling it opaque and akin to a lottery. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, hearing a petition from an employee of the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (HPPSC), observed that the current mechanism lacks transparency and creates a perception that securing a government house is purely a matter of chance.
Court's Observations on Allotment Process
During the hearing, the state government, through the General Administration Department (GAD), submitted that the HPPSC has no separate housing pool and its employees are considered under the Himachal Pradesh Allotment of Government Residences (General Pool) Rules, 1994. The government noted that available residences are far fewer than eligible applicants, so no employee can claim allotment as a right. Allotments are made by a House Allotment Committee following prescribed rules.
However, the court found this response inadequate. Justice Goel remarked that the government's submission merely reiterated known facts and failed to address the larger issue of the absence of dedicated accommodation for independent constitutional bodies like the HPPSC. He observed that the GAD's monopoly over government housing, combined with a lack of transparency, has led employees to view allotment as “nothing short of a lottery.”
Proposed Reforms for Transparency
To improve fairness, the court suggested replacing the current practice of requiring fresh applications every year with a permanent, centralized waiting list. Under this system, applicants would retain seniority based on their initial application date. Those allotted accommodation would be removed, while new applicants would be added without affecting the seniority of existing waitlisted individuals.
The court also emphasized that independent institutions like the HPPSC should maintain at least a limited stock of dedicated residential accommodation. This would allow such bodies to allot housing based on functional and administrative needs, reducing dependence on the general pool.
Next Steps in the Case
The Additional Advocate General assured the court that the concerns raised would be brought to the attention of competent authorities. The matter has been adjourned to July 20, with the court expecting a more considered and practical response from the state government. The case originated from a petition by an HPPSC employee seeking government accommodation.
