IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Lt. Col. Ashok Bembey ... Petitioner Vs.

Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission and another ... Respondents Reserved on: 12.01.2026 Pronounced on: 02.02.2026 Uploaded on: 02.02.2026 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced ? No Whether full judgment is pronounced ? Yes CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Petitioner-in-person. Ms. Gargi Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Pritish Goel, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab.

*******

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. Present petition has been preferred under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 12.09.2016 (Annexure P-26), vide which claim of the petitioner for grant of pension and remaining part of gratuity and leave encashment was rejected and further to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioner along with interest @18% per annum.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. Upon acquiring a diploma in Mechanical Engineering followed by graduation in Science, the petitioner joined the Indian Army as a Commissioned Officer in June, 1973 and retired therefrom on 23.11.1997. During his service, the petitioner also acquired a post-graduate diploma in Personnel Management and Industrial Relations from Symbiosis, Pune. Respondent No.1-Commission sanctioned various posts in terms of letter dated 19/21.12.2000 (Annexure P-1A) and sought names from various government departments, including the Punjab Ex-servicemen Corporation under the Department of Defence Welfare, Government of Punjab towards the same. The name of the petitioner was also recommended and he was eventually appointed as Deputy Director (Media and Housekeeping) with the respondent- Commission vide appointment letter dated 28.02.2002 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner joined duty on 04.03.2002 and his appointment was renewed time and again till 03.03.2014 against a regular sanctioned post. Thereafter, vide appointment letter dated 03.03.2014 (Annexure P-4), the petitioner was given appointment on contract basis and his pay, an ex-serviceman, has been fixed as per instructions dated 23.01.1992 (Annexure P-5) issued by the Government of Punjab, which also forms a part of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol. II. The petitioner is already drawing military pension, but made a claim to pension in lieu of his civil re-employment, which was rejected by respondent No.1 vide impugned order dated 12.09.2016 (Annexure P-26). Hence, the present writ petition.

CONTENTIONS

3. The petitioner, who is appearing in person, submitted that he is an Ex-serviceman and was re-employed by respondent No.1-Commission from 04.03.2002 to 03.03.2014 against a regular sanctioned post. As such, he has rendered 12 years of uninterrupted service with respondent No.1-Commission. In terms of the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-servicemen Rules, 1982 issued by the Government of Punjab vide notification dated 02.02.1982 (Annexure P-1), the recruitment of Ex-servicemen to civil services by the State government would fall under the category of ‘direct appointment.’ Further, the service of a military pensioner engaged in civil re-employment is governed by Rule 7.19 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules (for short ‘PCS Rules’) while Rule 7.17 makes it clear that re-employment of civil pensioners shall be in a ‘purely temporary capacity.’ Further still, Rule 3.12 of PCS Rules allows for grant of pension, if the employee has served for 10 years or more and the petitioner satisfies this requirement, as he has worked with the respondent-Commission from 04.03.2002 to 03.03.2014. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of pension, gratuity and leave encashment as per PCS Rules as well as instructions dated 23.01.1992 (Annexure R-1/9) issued by the Government of Punjab for the entire period of regular service, spanning 12 years, rendered by h