PREM SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that though he was eligible to be sponsored for appointment for the post of Forest Guard against the ex -servicemen quota, the respondent No. 2 Directorate of Sainik Welfare, Himachal Pradesh did not sponsor his name and resultantly a person junior to him i.e. respondent No. 3 Sarwan Kumar was sponsored and appointed against the said post.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was born on 17th March, 1954. He joined the Indian Army some time in the year 1974 and was discharged on 30.9.1989. He thereafter enrolled himself with the Directorate of Sainik Welfare as well as Employment Exchange. It is not disputed that his name was also empanelled for being appointed to the post of Forest Guard. A requisition was issued for recruitment of a large number of forest guards. In so far as Bilaspur District is concerned there were 40 anticipated vacancies out of which five fell to the category of ex -servicemen; three in the general category, one in OBC and one in scheduled caste category. The petitioner admittedly retired before respondent No. 3 who retired in the year 1990.

(3.) THIS clearly shows that there is no upper age limit for appointment of ex -Servicemen when they are appointed against a post reserved for ex -Servicemen. From the material on record it is obvious that respondent No. 3 has been appointed against a been appointed against the said post.