JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. (Oral) 1. Undisputedly, all the petitioners were appointed as hostel attendants in Asian-African Hostel by the Chief Warden of the Asian-African Hostel commonly known as “Khosla International House”; as per condition no. 5 of the appointment letter available on the record as Annexure no. 2 to the writ petition, petitioners would be entitled to avail the University’s medical facilities as per University Rules; all the petitioners were availing full medical facilities like the other employees of the University; in the year 2001, University of Roorkee was declared as Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee; vide impugned order dated 24th September, 2007 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Administration) of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Khosla International House staff and their dependents were directed to avail only those medical facilities, which are available in the Institute Hospital. In other words, petitioners/staff of the Khosla International House would not be entitled for the medical reimbursement of the medical bills for treatment taken from the hospitals and nursing homes outside the hospital of the Institute. 2. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners have knocked the doors of this Court assailing the order dated 24th September, 2007 and saying that their services conditions cannot be reduced by the Deputy Registrar (Administration) and no opportunity of being heard was ever granted to the petitioners before passing the impugned order dated 24th September, 2007 and action of the Deputy Registrar (Administration) in reducing the service condition would amount to discrimination between the other employees of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee and the employees working in the Khosla International House within the campus of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. 3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents stating therein that Khosla International House is an independent body and the petitioners are being paid salary from the funds of Khosla International House, which is being used to accommodate the Central Government Trainee Officers, who come to participate in various training programmes undertaken by the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that since petitioners were neither employees of the University of Roorkee, nor now employees of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, therefore, they cannot seek parity with regular employees of University of Roorkee or Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. 4. I have heard Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. 4. I have heard Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vipul Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents and have carefully perused the record. 5. As indicated hereinbefore, all the petitioners were appointed by the Warden of Khosla International House and as per condition no. 5 of the appointment letter, all the petitioners were entitled to avail medical facilities provided by the earlier University of Roorkee and thereafter, the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee as per the prevailing Rules. As per the prevailing Rules, at the time of appointment of the petitioners, all the petitioners were entitled for full medical facilities like reimbursement of the medical expenses for the treatment availed outside the Hospital of the University of Roorkee and, thereafter, the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. 6. First of all, if the petitioners are not the employees of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee as stated in the counter affidavit, the Deputy Registrar (Administration) of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee has absolutely no right to pass the impugned order reducing the medical facilities being availed by the petitioners. 7. Undisputedly, petitioners are working in a Hostel known as Khosla International House, which is situated within the campus of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee and is a hostel for Central Government employees coming to the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee for training or further studies. 8. Basically, petitioners are also discharging identical duties like other employees of the other hostels of the Indian Institute of Technology, therefore, there seems to be no valid reason for depriving the petitioners from availing medical facilities, which are being provided to other employees working in other hostels. 9. Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed and it is held that the petitioners shall also be entitled for full medical facilities, which they were availing right from their appointment as per condition no. 5 of the appointment letter. 10. No order as to costs. 11. CLMA No. 3433 of 2008 also stands disposed of accordingly.