Judgment :- 1. This writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for and quash the impugned order of the respondent, dated 2.2.2011. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner was working at the Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai. He had been transferred to the Sub Jail, Ponneri, as a Grade II Warder, on 17.2.2010. In view of the transfer of the petitioner, he had been directed to vacate the quarters allotted to him at Chennai. However, the petitioner had not vacated the quarters on account of his family circumstances. In such circumstances, the respondent had directed the petitioner to pay the penal rent of Rs.2,520/-for the period when the petitioner was in unauthorised occupation of the quarters at Chennai. By the impugned order, the respondent had directed the recovery of the said amount from the petitioner, every month, as per Rule No.157 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume-II and the memo issued by the Additional Director General of Police and Inspector General of Prisons, dated 25.3.2003. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that a number of persons, similarly placed as that of the petitioner, had been allowed to continue to occupy the quarters allotted to them, even though they have been transferred to various places. No penal rent had been collected from such persons. Therefore, the action of the respondent in directing the petitioner to pay the penal rent of Rs.2,520/- per month, for the period when he had been in unauthorised occupation of the quarters allotted to him at Chennai, is arbitrary and illegal. It had also been submitted that the petitioner had been retransferred to Chennai, subsequently. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent had submitted that the petitioner had been directed to pay the penal rent of Rs.2,520/-per month, for the period when he had been in unauthorised occupation of the quarters allotted to him at Chennai, as he had been transferred to Sub Jail, Ponneri, by the proceedings of the Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison-II, Puzhal, Chennai, dated 17.2.2010. 5. 5. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent had further submitted that the petitioner had been directed to pay the penal rent, as per Rule No.157 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume-II and the memo issued by the Additional Director General of Police and Inspector General of Prisons, dated 25.3.2003. 6. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent had further submitted that no other similarly placed persons as that of the petitioner had been allowed to occupy the quarters, unauthorisedly, as alleged by the petitioner. He had further submitted that if there are such persons, who are occupying the quarters allotted to them, unauthorisedly, action would be taken against them, as per law. 7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent, and on a perusal of the records available, it is seen that the petitioner had been directed to pay the penal rent of Rs.2,520/-for the period he had been in unauthorised occupation of the quarters allotted to him at Chennai, as per Rule No.157 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume-II and the memo issued by the Additional Director General of Police and Inspector General of Prisons, dated 25.3.2003. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been occupying the quarters allotted to him at Chennai, when he was working at the Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai. However, the petitioner had been occupying the said quarters, even after he had been transferred to the Sub Jail, Ponneri, as a Grade II Warder, on 17.2.2010. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to accept the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner had been asked to pay the penal rent for the period when he had been in unauthorised occupation of the quarters allotted to him at Chennai, as per Rule No.157 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume-II and the memo issued by the Additional Director General of Police and Inspector General of Prisons, dated 25.3.2003. As such, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is devoid of merits. Hence, it stands dismissed. No costs. Connected M.P.No.1 of 2011 is closed.