IMPORTANT POINT
If a person who served in the Armed Forces is released or discharged at his own request after being granted benefit of pension, he is ex-servicemen for the purpose of appointment under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules.

Headnote:Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Serivcemen Rules, 1982-Rule 2(e) substituted by Rule 2(c)(i), (ii) and (iv)-Definition of ex-serviceman -Army Rule-Rule 13(3) II (iv)-Appellant discharged at his own request after earning his pension applying for post reserved for ex-servicemen-Appeared in competitive examination but result not declared as Punjab Public Service Commission considered that a person discharged at his own request from Indian Army was not an ex-servicemen-Writ against-Dismissed by High Court-Appeals against to Supreme Court-Whether appellants are ex-servicemen for the purpose of appointment under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-servicemen Rules? (Yes)-Appeal allowed -Suitable directions issued. (See Paras 9 to 12).
       Held : Because of the exclusory definition of the term ex-servicemen the High Court was not persuaded to accept the claim of the appellant that he should be considered as an ex-serviceman. (Para 9)
       But held : The High Court, in our view, is not justified in placing reliance on sub-clause (iv) of the definition clause and excluding the writ petitioners from the eligible category on that basis. Sub-clause (iv) has no application in the instant case for the reason that it applies to such of those persons who are relieved from service after specific period of engagement and become entitled to get gratuity. If a person, who served in the armed forces, is released after being granted the benefit of pension, the case is taken out of purview of sub-clause (iv). The exclusionary words "otherwise than at his own request" occurring in sub-clause (iv) cannot, therefore, be relied upon to deny the benefit to the appellants. Then the question arises whether such person would fall under sub-clause (i)? True, according to the terminology used in the Service Rules governing the armed forces there is a distinction between retirement and release/discharge, as pointed out by the High Court. But, in the context of definition of ex-serviceman in Rule 2(c)(ii), broader meaning has to be given to the word `retired occurring in sub-clause (i). In principle and in the light of the considerations set out above, there is no rational basis for excluding those discharged or released from service after earning pension. It is only after considerable period of satisfactory service a member of armed forces becomes entitled to pension. The mere fact that after such long period of service he voluntarily quit the service with the consent of the employer should not place him in a disadvantageous position for claiming the benefit of reservation for ex-serviceman. Therefore, the expression `retirement should be given wider meaning in order to effectuate the objective behind the Rule. (Para 11)
       Held consequently : On the discussions in the foregoing paragraphs the appeals are allowed. The judgment of the High Court dated 20.9.1999 in CWP No. 19084/98 is set aside. It is stated at the bar that the appellants in these appeals have appeared in the competitive examination but their results have not been declared. The respondents will take steps to declare their results forthwith and consider their case for appointment in terms of the service rules and in accordance with the law. There will be no order for costs. (Para 12)

JUDGMENT

D.P. Mohapatra, J.-Leave is granted in all the special leave petitions.

2. The question that falls for determination in these appeals is whether the appellants are ex-servicemen for the purpose of appointment under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-servicemen Rules (for short the Rules ). These appeals are directed against the common judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellants. Since all the writ petitions were disposed of by the judgment rendered in CWP No. 19084/98 filed by Sansar Chand Atri who is the appellant in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 3683 of 2000, the facts in that case are stated for sake of convenience :

3. In response to the advertisement dated 16.10.1998 issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission inviting applications for certain posts of the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial) Branch, which appeared in the newspaper Tribune on 16.10.98, the appellant submitted an application for appointment against one of the posts reserved for ex-servicemen. The competitive examination for recruitment to the post was to commence from 21.12.1998. The appellant was informed by the Commission that he could not be considered as an ex-serviceman as he had been discharged from the Indian Army at his own request. Feeling aggrieved by the action of the Commission in declining consideration of his candidature as ex-serviceman the appellant filed the aforementioned writ petition.

4. The appellant joined the Indian Army on 8.10.1972 while he was holding the post of Hawaldar. He was discharged from the Army on 1.11.1990 after rendering 18 years and 24 days of total service. The cause of discharge described in the discharge certificate was "under Army Rule 13(3) II (iv) at his own request". He is drawing pension as an ex-serviceman.

5. The question whether the appellant is an ex-servicemen or not is to be determined on the basis of the provisions of the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-servicemen Rules 1982 as amended by the Notification dated 22.9.1992. The said Rules were framed by the Government of Punjab in exercise of the power conferred by the proviso to Article 309 read with Articles 234 and 318 of the Constitution. In Rule 2(e) thereof, ex-servicemen is defined as follows :

"Rule 2(e) `Ex-Servicemen means a person who joined any rank, whether as a combatant or as a non-combatant on or after the first day of November, 1962, in the Armed Forces of the Union, excluding the Assam Rifles, Lock Sahetak Sena, Jammu and Kashmir Militia, Territorial Army, Defence Security Corps and the General Reserve Engineering Force, and has been released otherwise than on ground of misconduct or inefficiency."

6. Rule 3 which makes provision regarding extent of application provides that the rule shall apply to all the State Civil Services and posts connected with the affairs of State of Punjab excepting the Punjab Vidhan Sabha and the Secretariat Services and the Punjab Higher Judicial Service. In Rule 4 provision is made for reservation of 15% of the vacancies to be filled in by direct appointment in all the State Civil Services and posts connected with the affairs of the State of Punjab to be filled in by recruitment of ex-servicemen. In the proviso to the said Rule a limit of 50% is prescribed for the total number of reserved vacancies.

7. In Rules 5 to 7 certain relaxations are made regarding the number of attempts which an ex-servicemen may make in the competitive examination, age limit for appointment and educational qualification and experience. From the provisions of the Rule it is clear that its purpose is to benefit the ex-servicemen in getting appointment to Civil posts under the State.

8. By the notification dated 22.9.1992 issued by the State Government certain provisions of the 1982 Rules were amended. The definition of ex-servicemen in Rule 2(c)(ii) was substituted by the provision quoted hereunder:

"Ex-servicemen" means a person who has served in any rank, whether as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2002 Supreme(SC) 424

IMPORTANT POINTIf a person who served in the Armed Forces is released or discharged at his own request after being granted benefit of pension, he is ex-servicemen for the purpose of appointment under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules.

IMPORTANT POINT
If a person who served in the Armed Forces is released or discharged at his own request after being granted benefit of pension, he is ex-servicemen for the purpose of appointment under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules.