Back
JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAMMU
Tashi Rabstan, Sindhu Sharma, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Kapil Dev – Respondent
LPA No. 111 of 2021
Decided On : 16-09-2022
Active Duty - Promotion - The court interpreted the term 'active duty' and held that playing a game during the game period, which is an integral part of duty, cannot be considered as being out of 'active service'. The court relied on the interpretation of 'active service' by the Delhi High Court and found in favor of the writ petitioner, directing promotion and granting senior time scale.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner was placed in a low medical category due to an injury sustained while playing cricket during the game period. The appellants rejected the claim for promotion based on the grounds that the injury did not occur while on active duty.
Finding of the Court:
The court found in favor of the writ petitioner, holding that the injury occurred during an integral part of duty and should be considered as being on 'active duty'. The court directed the promotion and granted senior time scale to the writ petitioner.
Issues: The main issue was whether the injury, due to which the writ petitioner was placed in a low medical category, occurred while being on active duty or not.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the interpretation of 'active service' by the Delhi High Court and held that playing the game during the game period, which is an integral part of duty, cannot be considered as being out of 'active service'.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge, directing the promotion and granting senior time scale to the writ petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Tashi Rabstan, J. - This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.03.2021 delivered by the learned Single Judge in SWP No.161/2018, whereby the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition directed the writ respondents, appellants herein, to pass order of promotion of writ petitioner to the rank of Deputy Commandant after giving relaxation in terms of Para 4.17 of Standing Order No.4 of 2008.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival contentions and also perused the appeal file.
3. Admittedly, the appellants-writ respondents rejected the claim of writ petitioner for grant of senior time scale on the ground that the injury, because of which the writ petitioner has been placed in low medical category, has occurred while not being on active duty in view of Para 4.17 of the Standing Order No.4 of 2008. In terms of Para 4.17 of the Standing Order No.4 of 2008, relaxation for S1H1A1P1E2 medical category for promotion is admissible only to those personnel, who are kept in low medical category due to wound/injury during field firing/accidental firing/explosion of mines or explosive devises or due to accident while on active government duty in India or abroad.
4. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner came to be placed in low medical category, i.e., S1H1A1P1E2 because of the wound/injury suffered by him while playing cricket during game period. The only question to decide before the writ court was: as to whether the injury, because of which the writ petitioner came to be placed in low medical category, had occurred while being on active duty or not. The learned Single Bench while relying upon the judgment of Delhi High Court in Venkatesh vs Union of India (WP(C) 11263/2015) held that the injury sustained by the writ petitioner cannot be said to have been suffered while not on active duty. We are also in complete agreement with the interpretation put forth by the Delhi High Court on the term 'active service' as well as the findings of the learned Single Bench that a CRPF personal while playing the game during game period, which is an integral part of his duty, cannot be said to be out of 'active service'. Even otherwise, in a contempt petition, being CCP(S) No.187/2021, filed by the writ petitioner, which came to be disposed of on 04.08.2022, Mr. L.K. Moza, appearing for writ respondents, had made a statement before the Court that the judgment dated 23.03.2021 has been complied with; the writ petitioner has been granted Senior Time Scale vide order dated 04.05.2021, besides having been promoted to the rank of Deputy Commandant vide order dated 02.06.2022 and his seniority has also been fixed notionally in the rank of Deputy Commandant with effect from 02.11.2016.
5. Viewed thus, we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
The main legal point established is that activities integral to duty, such as playing a game during the game period, should be considered as being on 'active duty' for the purpose of promotion and gr....
The interpretation of 'active duty' and the recognition of E2 medical category for relaxation in SHAPE-I medical category under Clause 4.17(b)(iv) of the Standing Order 04/2008.
The petitioner is entitled to seniority from the date his juniors were promoted, as administrative delays in conducting the Medical Board should not penalize him.
The court ruled that substantive relief for promotion cannot be granted in a Miscellaneous Application, directing the applicant to approach the Armed Forces Tribunal for detailed examination.
The denial of promotion to a disabled employee must not be solely due to disability, and the promotion is subject to meeting statutorily prescribed medical eligibility conditions. The legislative int....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
