MOHINDER PAUL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to absorb him on the post of Assistant District Transport with all consequential benefits and for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 15.9.1994(Annexure P -5), dated 14.2.1997,(Annexure P -9) declining the benefit of being ex -serviceman and dated 3.3.1997 (Annexure P -11) whereby his claim for absorption as Assistant District Transport Officer was rejected.

(2.) THE petitioner joined the Indian Army on 31.12.1971 as Soldier during proclamation of emergency. He was assigned No. 1 Training Battalion of the Bengal Engineering Group and Centre, Roorkee. During the course of training, two or three soldiers recruited along with him died on account of some mysterious disease. On that account, the Commanding Officer of the Battalion asked the petitioner and others to seek release/discharge from the Army with the assurance that they would be recalled when their services would be needed. Under these circumstances, the petitioner was discharged from the Indian Army on 11.5.1972.

(3.) UNDAUNTED by the rejection of his claim, to get confirmation of the reasons for his discharge from the Army authorities he submitted further representations (Annexures P/6A to P6D) to respondent No. 2. In response to these representations of the petitioner, the respondent -Department wrote letter dated 3.4.1996 (Annexure P -7) to the Commanding Officer, Bengal Engineering Group and Centre, (I.T.B.), Roorkee (Uttar Pradesh) seeking clarification from the latter on the points (i) had the petitioner continued serving in Army, would he be eligible for pension, (ii) whether the post held by the petitioner was pensionable, and (iii) whether he had received any pensionary benefits from the Army. In response to letter (Annexure P -7), the Commanding Officer of No. 1 Training Battalion, Bengal Engineering Group and Centre, Roorkee, vide his letter dated 12.4.1996 (Annexure R -1) informed respondent No. 2 that had the petitioner continued in Army, on attaining the age of superannuation, he would have been entitled for pension and all other related benefits. Consequently, as per letter dated 5.6.1996 (Annexure P -8) the respondent -Department ordered that the service of the petitioner in the Army from 31.12.1971 to 11.5.1972 be counted towards pension and benefit in civil service. Thereafter, on 16.3.1998 and 4.5.1998, the petitioner submitted representations Annexure P -10 and P -13, respectively, stating that as benefit of military service had been granted to him by the respondent - Department and he had fulfilled the requisite qualification for the post of Assistant District Transport Officer, which was meant for ex -serviceman, he should be appointed on the said post. However, his claim was declined by the respondent -Department on the ground that in the Corporation he was appointed as Field Officer in the scale of Rs. 950 -1800 whereas the scale of Assistant District Transport Officer is Rs. 2000 -3500 and, as such, his case is not covered under the policy of the Government which provides that the surplus employees are to be adjusted in their own scale or one step up/less scale. Terming the action of the respondent -authorities as unjust, illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of the provision of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, he has filed this writ petition for the reliefs staled above.