THANESHWAR PRASAD KUNDALIA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner was recruited to the Short Service (Non -Technical) Vth Course of the Indian Army and he joined the Indian Army on 21 -08 -1967. After training he was commissioned as an officer of the Indian Army on 23 -06 -1968. The Petitioner was discharged from Indian Army on 09 -04 -1976. Thereafter, he was appointed as Secretary of the District Soldier Board on 17 -11 -1976 and he worked in that capacity till 10 -01 -1988. In the meanwhile, the Petitioner passed the Provincial Civil Services (PCS) Examination and he was appointed as Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Enforcement) as per order dated 30 -11 -1987. He joined service of the Government of Uttar Pradesh as Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Enforcement) on 11 -01 -1988. On formation of the State of Uttaranchal, the Petitioner has been allotted to the State of Uttaranchal and at present, he is working as Regional Transport Officer, Kumaon Region.

(2.) UNDER the Uttar Pradesh Non -Technical (Class II/Group B) Services (Appointment of Demobilized Officers) Rules 1980, emergency commissioned officers and short service commissioned officers of the armed forces of the Union who were commissioned on or after November 01, 1962 but before January 10, 1968 or on or after December 03, 1971 and released at any time thereafter and got appointment in terms of Rule 4 of the above -mentioned Rules, are entitled to the benefit of counting the period of service in the Army for the purpose of determining the length of service for the purpose of seniority in Government service. The Petitioner and similarly placed Government employees had filed writ petitions before the High Court of Allahabad challenging the discrimination shown against those who were commissioned after 10th January 1968 and before 3rd December 1971. They contended that the denial of the benefit of counting the period of service in the Army to such officers, is arbitrary and discriminatory. Though the High Court upheld the contention of the Petitioner and other Government employees and allowed the writ petitions filed by them, the State of Uttar Pradesh filed appeals before the Supreme Court and in the judgement reported in : 1994(2) SCC 622, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the judgement of the High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the classification between the officers commissioned prior to 10th January 1968 and those commissioned after 10th January 1968.

(3.) REALISING that a similarly placed person was declared to be entitled for the benefit under the Rules, the Petitioner also filed representation before the Government of Uttaranchal seeking the very same benefit under the Rules. However, as per Annexure 11 Order dated 29 -03 -2005, the first Respondent rejected the request of the Petitioner on the ground that the benefit of the order in Jitendra Nath's case is available only to Jitendra Nath and not to the Petitioner.