SURESH KUMAR PATEL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the orders dated 11.02.2016 and 11.03.2016 passed by the respondent No.2.

(2.) The petitioner was enrolled in the Army Medical Corps of the Indian Army as an Ambulance Assistant (Sepoy) on 31.10.1997. On completion of pensionable service of 15 years, the petitioner submitted an application for premature retirement on 011.2012 due to his domestic problems. The application submitted by the petitioner was recommended by his Commanding Officer, however, the same was not accepted by the Army Authorities in spite of repeated requests by the petitioner. The petitioner filed O.A. No.74/2014 before the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow seeking direction to the Army Authorities to discharge the petitioner from service. The Tribunal vide order dated 13.10.2014 Writ Petition No.5616/2016 directed the Army Authorities to discharge the petitioner from service with effect from 31.10.2014. Consequent to the order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner has been discharged from service with effect from 01.11.2014. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 has published an advertisement in December, 2013 thereby inviting applications for holding examination in State Civil Services. The petitioner submitted his candidature under Ex. Serviceman Category vide his on line application on 19.01.2014. The application submitted by the petitioner was accepted and the petitioner was permitted to appear in the preliminary examination held on 27.07.2014. The petitioner was declared successful in the preliminary examination in Ex. Serviceman Category. The petitioner was issued an admit card for appearing in mains examination, which was held from 23.03.2015 to 06.04.2015. The petitioner was declared successful in mains examination and he was asked to submit his testimonial and documents for issuance of call letter for interview. The interview has been scheduled by the respondent No.2 from 29.02016 to 03.06.2016. However, instead of call letter, the petitioner has received a letter dated 11.02016 whereby the petitioner was informed that the candidature of the petitioner in Ex. Serviceman Category has been cancelled on the ground that on the date of submission of on line application on 04.02014, the petitioner was still in service of Army and he was not an Ex. Serviceman and therefore, the benefit was wrongly given to him. The petitioner was asked to submit his objection within a period of 15 days. Accordingly, the petitioner has submitted his objections on 20.02016. The objection has been rejected by the respondent No.2 vide order dated 11.03.2016. Being aggrieved by that, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the orders dated 11.02.2016 and 11.02016 are illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Ex. Serviceman Reservation Rules (hereinafter in short referred to as "the Rules"). It is submitted that as per Rule 3 of the Rules, the rules applied to all the State Civil Services and post, Class-III and Class-IV. Rule-4 makes a provision for reservation for vacancies for Ex. Serviceman and Rule 5 prescribes the limit for relaxation in age. It is further submitted that the petitioner has applied in the Ex. Serviceman category and succeeded in the preliminary and Mains examination. However, by issuing the impugned order, he has been precluded from participating in the interview. It is also submitted that the case of the petitioner falls within the category of Ex. Serviceman as defined in Rule 2(c) of the Rules. It is submitted that the petitioner had served for 17 years i.e. more than 5 years in the regular Army and therefore, as per Clause 2(c)(iii) he is to be treated as an Ex-Serviceman. Therefore, the aforesaid orders be set aside.