In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court addressed the issue of mid-journey destination changes under the Central Civil Services (Leave Travel Concession) Rules, 1988 (LTC Rules). The court clarified that government employees are not permitted to alter their travel destinations midway through their journey. If a change becomes unavoidable, the new destination must lie en route to the original destination.
The case involved a petitioner, a person with a disability employed as an Upper Division Clerk in the Income Tax Department under the Divyangjan quota. In July 2012, he declared his intention to utilize LTC for travel to Trivandrum and received an advance for this purpose. However, in April 2013, he sought permission to change his destination to Goa via Mumbai, opting to travel by car instead of by train. During the journey, upon reaching Mathura, he found the road trip to Goa excessively long and decided to divert to hill stations in Uttarakhand. Subsequently, he opted for voluntary retirement.
Upon retirement, the department adjusted the LTC advance against his gratuity, citing his failure to commence the journey to the declared destination within 30 days of receiving the advance. The petitioner challenged this adjustment, seeking clearance of his LTC bill.
A division bench comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Ajay Digpaul examined the provisions of the LTC Rules, particularly Rule 6, and an associated order dated September 1, 1979. The court emphasized that these provisions explicitly prohibit mid-journey changes in destination. If a change is necessitated by unavoidable circumstances, the new destination must be on the route to the originally declared destination.
The court observed that the petitioner initially planned to travel to Goa, located in the western part of India, but diverted to Uttarakhand in the northern region. This significant deviation indicated that the new destination was not en route to the original one. The bench stated, "A plain reading of LTC Rule-6 and Order No.25/D.G.P. & T.N.D.No.20/1/79-PAP dated 01.09.1979 makes this very simple that there will be no midway change in the destination and if due to some unavoidable circumstance it has been changed, then also it will be a destination which is en route."
Furthermore, the court highlighted the necessity of establishing "unavoidable circumstances" to justify any change in destination without prior permission. In this case, the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate such circumstances.
The court also noted that under Rule 6 of the LTC Rules, the petitioner was obligated to commence his journey within 30 days of receiving the advance. Instead of adhering to this requirement, he altered his travel plans without obtaining the necessary approvals. Consequently, the department's decision to adjust the LTC advance against his gratuity was deemed justified.
In conclusion, the Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's plea, reinforcing the principle that government employees must adhere strictly to the declared travel plans under the LTC scheme. Any deviations require prior approval, and changes due to unavoidable circumstances must be limited to destinations en route to the original plan. This judgment underscores the importance of compliance with established procedures to prevent misuse of government benefits and ensures that administrative processes remain transparent and efficient.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.