High CourtsSingle Bench

Sukhdev Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 26 February 2001 · Citation: (2001) 02 P&H CK 0153

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bakhshish Kaur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 · Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965 — Rule 4
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1624 of 1986
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 873 words

Bakhshish Kaur, J.—The petitioner has invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court by filing this writ petition with a prayer that the respondents be directed to fix his seniority by taking into consideration the services rendered by him in the Army during Emergency period.

2.

The petitioner joined the Indian Army on January 2, 1964 during the period of Emergency and he was discharged from military service on 6.7.1979 on medical grounds. Me was selected as Inspector in the Punjab Co-operative Bank and appointed as such on 8.5.1981 as per appointment letter Annexure P-1. He made an application to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Annexure P-2 for adjustment of seniority and service increments taking into account the service rendered by him in Army in view of the Punjab State Emergency Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the 1965 Rules''). No action was taken. He also submitted reminder, copy whereof is Annexure P-3 dated 4.7.1984. It was returned with the observation that he should submit the application after enclosing certain documents. He again submitted an application along-with certificate of discharge from the military services as well as an affidavit that he had not claimed the military benefit from the Cooperative Department till date. It was again returned this time with the remarks that he cannot be given the benefits as these benefits were not available then. The impugned action has been challenged on the ground that once the petitioner was entitled to increments and seniority, the same could not be denied to him.

3.

The respondents in their joint written statement, have admitted certain facts such as the averment regarding service rendered by the petitioner in the Army and later on his appointment as Inspector. But it is denied that the petitioner is entitled to any benefits of the service rendered by him in the Army in view of the 1965 rules because he was recruited against a reserved vacancy under the Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in the Punjab State Non-Technical Services) Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as ''the 1968 Rules'') which remained in force till 11.2.1982, therefore, he is not entitled to avail any benefit of military service under the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965. The benefit of 1968 rules would have been admissible to him only if he had fulfilled the basic qualifications prescribed for the post of inspector. Cooperative Societies. He was under graduate on 2.1.1964 i.e. on the date when he joined the Indian Army, He had passed the graduation only on 30.6.1979 and he was discharged from military service on 6.7.1979, therefore, he become eligible for the posts of Inspector only from 30.6.1979 (the date of his passing the graduation). Therefore, he did not fulfil the basic qualification for the post of Inspector at the time of joining the military service. The benefits under 1968 rules are, therefore, not available to him.

4.

I have heard Shri Sushant Maini, learned Deputy Advocate General Punjab. None has, however, appeared on behalf of the petitioner despite the fact that the petitioner''s counsel was informed by the office.

5.

The petitioner is claiming benefit of the military service rendered by him during Emergency under the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965, Rule 4 of the 1965 rules provides that the period of military service shall be counted for increment, seniority and pension. On the other hand, the case set up by the respondents is that the petitioner is not entitled to benefit under 1965 rules as well as the Punjab Recruitment of Ex- Servicemen Rules, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as '' 1982 Rules'') as he did not fulfill the qualification for the post of Inspector in the Cooperative Societies at the time of his joining military service since he was under- graduate at that time and the requisite qualification for the post of Inspector is graduation which he acquired later on. Moreover, the 1965 rules remained in force till 11.2.1982 after which date, the 1982 Rules came into force whereby the previous Rules were repealed and thus, the benefit of military service which was available to him under the previous rules, was no longer available to him under the new rules. According to para 10 of the new rules i.e. 1982 Rules, the previous rules were repealed under which the benefit of military service was granted. The benefit of military service was admissible to the petitioner only under the Demobilised Army Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in the Punjab State Non-Technical Services) Rules, 1968, but since he was not fulfilling the basic qualification prescribed for the post of Inspector Cooperative Societies when he joined the Indian Army, therefore, the benefit of 1968 Rules could also not be conferred upon him. He was under graduate on 2.1.1964 i.e. on the date when he joined the Indian Army. He passed his graduation only on 30.6.1978 and he was released from military service on 6.7.1979. He thus became eligible for the post of inspector only w.e.f. 30.6.1979 Thus, as per rules 5(i) of 1968 Rules, the petitioner is not entitled for the grant of benefit of military service.

6.

In view of the above, there is no merit in this writ petition. The name is dismissed.

7.

Petition dismissed.