IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

103 RA-CW-562-2024 in/and Date of decision : 24.01.2025 PARMINDER JEET SINGH ...... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ***

Present :- Mr. H. C. Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. T. P. S. Chawla, Senior DAG, Punjab.

***

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

RA-CW-562-2024 The present review application has been filed for the review of the order dated 09.12.2024 by which, the writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed qua the claim for appointment to the post of Principal under the category of ex-serviceman.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner has only been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is not dependent, whereas, dependency was not needed in order to become eligible for the post of Principal hence, the order dated 09.12.2024 is liable to be reviewed.

Notice of the application.

Mr. T. P. S. Chawla, Senior DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents-State.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the order dated

09.12.2024 is recalled and on the joint request, the writ petition is taken up for consideration. CWP-8788-2020

1. In the present writ petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner competed for the post of Principal in pursuance to the Advertisement dated 09.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) in the reserved category of dependent of ex-serviceman but ultimately, the petitioner was found ineligible to compete for the post in question on the ground that the petitioner was already working as computer faculty in the PICTES (Punjab Information and Communication Technology Education Society) and had availed the benefit of being dependent of ex-serviceman while securing that appointment.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not working in a Government institution hence, treating the said appointment in PICTES (Punjab Information and Communication Technology Education Society) as Government job so as the petitioner looses his right to claim to be a dependent upon ex-serviceman father, is incorrect and only where, the dependent of an ex-serviceman is working on a Government job, will take away right to be dependent upon ex-serviceman hence, the respondents were under an obligation to grant the petitioner the consideration for appointment to the post of Principal on contract basis under the category of dependent of ex-serviceman (BC).

3. Upon notice of motion, the respondents have filed the reply wherein, the respondents have stated that the petitioner is employed as a computer faculty in PICTES (Punjab Information and Communication Technology Education Society) and even while getting the said appointment, the petitioner got the appointment under the reserved category of dependent of ex-serviceman hence, once the benefit of being dependent of ex- serviceman has already been availed by the petitioner and the petitioner was actually working as a computer faculty while applying for the post in question, non-grant of the benefit of being dependent of ex-serviceman for the post in question, is perfectly valid and legal.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

5. In the present petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is entitled to be treated eligible for selection and appointment to the post of Principal in pursuance to the advertisement in question being the lenial descendant of the ex-serviceman.

6. It may be noticed that the advertisement in question prescribed certain eligibility conditions qua the posts which have been reserved for the ex-serviceman in Clause 15.3 of the advertisement which is reproduced hereunder:-

“15.3 EX-SERVICEMEN (PUNJAB)

15.3.1 "Ex-serviceman" means person who has served in any rank, whether as a combatant 4or a non combatant, in the Naval, Military and Air Force of the Uni