J.S. Chauhan, Secretary Zila Sainik Board vs State of Haryana

Bakhshish Kaur, J.—The Petitioner served the Indian Army as Short Service Commissioned Officer from 15.6.1969 to 11.9.1979. He was released from the service after servicing for more than 10 years. On 2.11.1982, he was selected and appointed as Assistant Secretary, Zila Sainik Board (in short the ''Board''), Government of Haryana, and later promoted as Secretary, Board, as per Annexure P-2.

The petitioner''s claim is that the service rendered by him in the Army should be counted for the purpose of grant of advance increments at the time of joining civil post equal to the completed years of service rendered by him in Armed Forces. The benefits which have not been granted to him till today were in fact given to Mr. V.S. Narwal and Mr. J.S. Bishnoi, ex-Captains. The petitioner''s case is similar to their case but the authorities concerned have not considered his case on these guidelines till today. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondents to grant him the benefit of military service in the same manner as has been granted to the aforesaid officers.

The respondents, in their written statement, admitted the factual position regarding the release of the petitioner from the Indian Army and his appointment as Assistant Secretary on 2.11.1982 but it is pleaded inter-alia that the petitioner is relying on the instructions issued by the Government of India vide Notification No. 2/1/86 ESTT. (P.III) dated 31.7.1986. These instructions have not been adopted by the State Government. Therefore petitioner cannot claim any benefit of these instructions.

I have heard Shri S.S. Dinarpur, counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Geeta Mutharia, learned AAG, Haryana, for the respondents.

The factual matrix of the case is not in dispute, that is, the petitioner is an ex-Army officer and immediately after his release he was selected as Assistant Secretary in the Board. Capt, V.S. Narwal had also filed a petition on the similar grounds which was accepted by this Court as per Annexure P-11. Earlier to that in the case of ex-Captain J.S. Bishnoi it was observed by a Division Bench of this Court while disposing of CWP No. 3265 of 1995 of ex- Captain V.S. Narwal as under :-

"Even otherwise it appears that the Government of India had convened general decision vide notification dated July 31, 1986 regarding the grant of advance increments to the officers who join civil service after their discharge from the Army. The State Government having accepted this decision and implemented it in the case of ex-Captain J.S. Bishnoi, should have granted a similar benefit even to the petitioner.

As regards the claim to pension, the provisions in Rule 4.3. (ibid) is clear. It postulated that the service rendered by an employee after attaining the age of 18 years, which is pensionable under Military Rules, when followed by civil service shall be allowed to count towards pension. The Rule further postulated that any bonus or gratuity received by the employee in lieu of pension on his discharge from the Military Service shall be refunded in such monthly instalments as the Government may decide. In view of this provision, the petitioner would be entitled to count the period of service from March 18, 1978 to April 4, 1984 towards pension on his retirement from the civil post. He would also have to refund the amount of gratuity or bonus, if any, received by him, in lieu of pension at the time of his discharge."

In view of the above, the case of the petitioner also stands on the same footing and he is entitled to the relief for counting his service in the Army towards grant of advance increments as also pension.

This writ petition is, therefore, allowed. The respondents are directed to count the petitioner is service in the Army from 15.6.1969 to 11.9.1979 towards the grant of advance increments as also pension.

The representation of the petitioner was as rejected by the respondents as per Annexure P-8 on the grounds that the instructions in question issued by the Government of India have not been adopted by the State Government and even if these instructions have been adopted they would be applicable only to those who had joined the civil service on or after 1.7.1986 on unreserved post, whereas the petitioner was appointed against the reserved post before 1.7.1986, i.e., 2.11.1982.

Capt. V.S. Narwal whose claim was accepted for counting the military service rendered by him from March 17, 1978 to April 4, 1984, as per Annexure P-11, by this Court, was promoted as Secretary on March 5, 1993. The petitioner in this case was appointed as Assistant Secretary in the Board on 2.11.1982 and promoted as Secretary as per Annexure P-2 on 9.1.1996. Thus, his case is not distinguishable from the case of ex-Captain V.S. Narwal, decided vide Annexure P-11.

In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to count the petitioner''s service in the Army from 15.6.1969 to 11.9.1979 towards the grant of advance increments as also pension. His pay shall be refixed. He shall also be entitled to the arrears. The needful be done within four months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. Upon calculation, in case it is found that the petitioner is liable to refund any amount, on account of receipt of gratuity etc., the authorities concerned shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with the rules and the petitioner shall refund the amount accordingly.

No order as to costs.

Petition allowed.