Civil Writ Petition No.11828 of 1989 -1-
` IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
Civil Writ Petition No.11828 of 1989
Date of Decision:29.04.2009
Lal Singh Gill
.....Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
Present:- Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs. Sudeepti Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
****
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
M.M. KUMAR, J.
The instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution seeking quashing of the decision of the Departmental
Selection Committee dated 12.12.1988 (Annexure P.9). According to the
afore-mentioned decision, the Departmental Selection Committee-
respondent No.3 has declined the entitlement of the petitioner to apply
under the category of Ex-servicemen for appointment to the post of D.P.E.
Master on the ground that he was to retire in January, 1989 and he could
have applied a year before the date of his retirement. It is appropriate to
mention that the application by the petitioner was made in February, 1985
which was obviously about four years before the date of his retirement.
In response to notice of motion, the respondent- State has filed
the reply and has taken the stand that as per the notification dated
Civil Writ Petition No.11828 of 1989 -2-
27.10.1986 (Annexure P.7) amending the Ex-servicemen (Re-Employment
in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules 1979 (for brevity `the 1979
Rules’), a provision has been made for the persons serving in the Armed
Force of the Union, who on retirement from service, would come under the
category of “Ex-servicemen”, such persons were permitted to apply for re-
employment one year before the completion of specified terms of
engagement in the Army. It has been clarified that the petitioner applied for
the post of D.P.E. during the month of June, 1985 whereas he was due to
retire from military service on 31.1.1989. Therefore, he was not eligible to
apply and to be considered for the post of D.P.E.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the
considered view that explanation added by the amendment to 1979 Rules
(Annexure P.7) is explicit which reads as under:-
“Explanation:- The persons serving in the Armed Force of the
Union, who on retirement from Service, would come under the
category of “Ex-servicemen” may be permitted to apply for re-
employment one year before the completion of the specified
terms of engagement and avail themselves of all concessions
available to ex-servicemen but shall not be permitted to leave
the uniform until they complete the specified term of
engagement in the Armed Forces of the Union.”
A perusal of the aforesaid explanation shows that persons
serving in the Armed Force of the Union has been permitted to apply for re-
employment one year before the completion of specified terms of
engagement and avail themselves of all concessions available to Ex-
servicemen provided they were to come under the category of Ex-
Civil Writ Petition No.11828 of 1989 -3-
Servicemen after the completion of specified terms of engagement.
Admittedly, the petitioner had applied in June, 1985 which is over three
years prior to the completion of his engagement. He did not fulfil the basic
requirement of the 1979 Rules and could not have been considered for
appointment on the same post. Even otherwise, the date of birth of the
petitioner is 6.12.1945. Accordingly, the petition fails and is dismissed.
April 29, 2009 ( M.M. KUMAR ) renu JUDGE