Om Prakash Verma vs Managing Director, HP State Handicrafts and Handloom Corporation Ltd.

V.K. Sharma, J.—The petition has been filed on the following averments set up vide para 6(a) to (d):

a). That the applicant joined the Indian Army as Lance Naik on 24.5.1963 in the J & K Rifle. He was released from Army on retirement, after putting in 15 years of service on 31.5.1978. Prior to his retirement, he availed of 4 months leave from 1.2.1978 to 31.5.1978.

b). That when the applicant was on leave before retirement, he starting exploring possibilities of getting a job and through the Employment Exchange, Kullu, he was offered the job of Master Craftsman (Weaving in the Respondent Corporation. In pursuance to the letter of appointment issued to him, the applicant joined as such on 30.5.1978. It would not be out of place to mention that the applicant had applied for the post in the ex-servicemen, was never filled up by the Respondent.

c). That since the applicant joined the service in the Respondent Corporation, two days earlier to his retirement from the Indian Army, he refunded the salary of two days to the army authorities. From the very beginning, the applicant had been requesting the Respondent to give him the benefit of 15 years service rendered in the Indian Army for purpose of fixation of pay. Despite his numerous letters in this behalf, the Respondent did not given the benefit of the army service rendered by the applicant.

d). That as per the Himachal Pradesh Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in Himachal State Non-Technical Service) Rules, 1972, the applicant is entitled to get the benefit of having his army service counted for purposes of fixation of his pay. The only ground taken for rejecting his case is that he was not appointed against a reserved post. As already mentioned above, even at the time when the applicant joined the service in the Respondent Corporation, there was one reserved post lying vacant and he should have been considered against the same. This post reserved for ex-serviceman, was not filled in by the Respondent only with a view to harass the applicant.

On the above averments, the petition has been filed on the following prayer vide para 7 (a):

(a) Direct the Respondent to consider the case of the applicant for giving him the benefit of army service in view of the clear guidelines and also as per various decisions of this Hon''ble Court for giving him benefit by counting his army service for fixation of pay and to fix his pay and pension by giving him benefit of the army service rendered.

In reply on behalf of the Respondent, the following stand has been taken vide para 6(c) and (d):

c). That the applicant joined on 30.5.1978 and after the period of 4 years I. e. in the year 1982 he applied for the grant of benefits being ex-serviceman of Indian Army and accordingly the Corporation too-up the case with the State Govt. for grant of these benefits to him. The Joint Secretary ( Industries) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide his letter No. Ind. A(F)-11-10/94 dated 6.6.1994 clarified that Shri Om Parkash Verma had been appointed in the corporation against un-reserved post and he never submitted his option for the reserve post of ex-serviceman. Therefore, under Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel( Reservation of vacancies in Himachal State Non-Technical Service) Rule 1972 he is not entitled for the grant of 15 years service benefits as well as seniority ( Annexure R-I). It is however stated that the corporation had given all the usual retirement benefits to Sh. Om Parkash Verma from the date4 of his joining in the Corporation I.e. 30.5.1978 to the date of his retirement (I.e.31.12.1994) which was opted by him under Voluntary Retirement scheme (VRS) floated by the State Govt. and adopted by the Respondent. The retirement gratuity as well as leave encashment were also paid to the applicant accordingly.

d). it is not correct that the applicant was appointed against a reserve post of ex-serviceman category, because the Corporation had filled up two posts of Master Craftsman (Weaving) through Employment Exchange and out of these two posts one was reserved for Schedule Caste and other was filled up from open category. The applicant was appointed against the post of open category. According to the reservation roster also during the year 1978 the 3rd point was only meant for ex-serviceman category. Therefore, out of total two posts the question of making an appointment of ex-serviceman did not arise. Hence the claim of the applicant stands denied.

Some undisputed facts may be noticed first. The Petitioner, an ex-servicemen, on retirement from army service had joined civil service on the establishment of the Respondent as Master Craftsman (Weaving) on 30.5.1978. Whereas, according to him the post against which he was appointed was advertised against the reserved category meant for ex-servicemen, the stand of the Respondent is that it was a general vacancy. However, a bare perusal of advertisement notice dated 8.4.1978, Annexure A-2 and application dated 21.4.1998, Annexure A-3, submitted by the applicant for the said post, would go to show that in fact the vacancy was meant for reserved category of ex-servicemen and the Petitioner had applied for the post on the strength of his status as an ex-serviceman.

In view of the above, the Petitioner is entitled for the relief claimed and accordingly the petition is allowed with a direction to the Respondent to consider the case of the Petitioner for grant of the benefit of army service for fixation of pay and pension in accordance with The Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in the Himachal State Non-Technical Service) Rules, 1972 along with all the consequential benefits within three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the Petitioner to the Respondent, failing which interest @9% per annum shall also be payable.

The petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP(s), if any.