JANG SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction specially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefit of 'military service' rendered by them during the National Emergency period, for the purpose of seniority and other consequential benefits, which they are entitled to in accordance with the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concessions) Rules, 1965, as also extended to the emergency period of 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). Before we proceed to discuss the pre-dominant features of this case which had persuaded the Division Bench of this Court to refer the matter to the Full Bench, it would be appropriate, for us to refer to the facts of the case in brief.

(2.) THE petitioners except petitioner No. 1 joined the military service prior to the date of proclamation of national emergency on 26. 10. 1962, while petitioner No. 1 joined military service on 20. 1. 1966 and served there till 3. 10. 1973. The relevant dates with regard to service of the petitioners during emergency period and joining education Department as appeared from the record are as under: " Jang Singh, D. P. E. Service during emergency : 20. 1. 1966 to 10. 1. 1968 Date of joining Education Department: (Ad hoc) 16. 4. 1979 Salwan Singh, D. P. E. Service during emergency : 1. 11. 1962 to 12. 3. 67 Date of joining Education Department. (Ad hoc) 21. 7. 1967 Darshan Singh, P. T. I. Service during emergency: 1. 11. 1962 to 9. 12. 66 Date of joining Education Department 6. 2. 1967. . . . . . . . . . Gurdip Singh, P. T. I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Service during emergency : 1. 11. 1962 to 5. 12. 1966 Date of Joining Edu. 11. 10. 1968 Department, as P. T. I. (Ad hoc) All the petitioners were regularised between 1972 to 1980. These petitioners have claimed that after their release from the armed forces, they were given employment in the Department of Education, Punjab Chandigarh. The petitioners claim benefits of military service rendered by them during emergency for the purposes of seniority, increments, re-fixation of salary and other admissible allowances in accordance with the rules applicable to their present employment. In order to raise valid claim, these petitioners served a legal notice upon the respondents dated 4. 3. 1994, Annexure P-6 to this petition. The claim of the petitioners in their legal notice was based upon the judgments of this Court and the Rules. As the petitioners were not given any relief in furtherance to the notice served by them upon the respondents, they were left with no other alternative but to file the present writ petition.

(3.) THOUGH no rejoinder was filed on behalf of the petitioners to the reply filed on behalf of the State, but an application Under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, being Civil Misc. No. 4059 of 1995, was filed to place on record Annexure P-7. This application was allowed by the Court and Annexure P-7 was directed to be taken on record. The relevant extract of Annexure P/7, which is a letter dated 8. 12. 1993 by the Director of Social Welfare, Punjab, needs to be referred as it would be of some consequence during discussion of the case on merits by us: "subject:- Eligibility criteria for military service benefit to those who served during the emergency even if they had joined the army prior to the proclamation of emergency. I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and draw your attention towards the latest judgment in C. W. P. No. 10292 of 1989 decided on 13. 1. 1992. In its verdict of the Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the military service as defined in Rules 2 of the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965 does not differentiate between a person who was enrolled or commissioned in the Indian Army prior to the proclamation of emergency or during or thereafter. 2. Earlier this concession was disallowed in certain cases to persons who had joined military service prior to the proclamation of emergency in view of the judgment in Nirmal Singh v. PSEB. The Legal Remembrancer has advised in view of the latest judgment referred to above (Para 1) that the judgment in the case of Nirmal Singh v. PSEB need not be adopted in other cases. 3. It is, therefore, directed that all such cases where military service benefit was denied to the Ex-service re-employed in the Civil on the ground that they had joined military service prior to the proclamation of emergency, may now be decided in the light of the judgment in CWP No. 10292 and the advice of L. R. thereon. 4. The subject relating to the policy matters pertaining to Ex-serviemen had since been transferred to this department from the department of personnel vide Government notification No. 1/7/91-GC (S)/17581, dated 28. 9. 1992. All such cases regarding service matters may, therefore, be referred to this department for advice in future. "