Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 238 (HP)

YOG RAJ v. STATE OF H. P.

2007-06-15

M.R.VERMA, VIJAY PAL SINGH

body2007
JUDGEMENT M.R. Verma, J. (Retd.) Chairman. (Oral).:-Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these original applications, therefore, these were heard together and are disposed by this common order. 2. The sum and substance of the dispute is that the applicants were enrolled in the Army and were discharged on medical grounds. With a view to secure re-employment the applicants registered their names with respondent No.3 i.e. Sub Regional Employment Officer (Cell Directorate of Employment and Employment Training, Hamirpur, H.P. However, respondent No.3 is not sponsoring their names for the posts for which they had got their names registered on the plea that they are only ex-recruits & not. Ex-servicemen and thus are not entitled for the benefits of re-employment as available to the Ex-servicemen under Rules. Aggrieved applicants have filed the present original applications seeking the reliefs (i) that anomaly created in the matter of sponsoring the names of Ex-recruits and Ex-servicemen being illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires may be quashed and set aside and both these categories may be treated at par for the purpose of re-employment and benefit under the relevant rules and (ii) that the, respondents may be directed to sponsor the names of the applicants as Ex-servicemen for re-employment against the post as per their registration. 3. The respondents disputed the claim of the applicants by filing reply and a supplementary affidavit and claimed that the ex-recruits are not covered under the definition of Ex-servicemen, therefore they are not entitled for such benefits as are available to the Ex-servicemen under the rules for securing re-employment on civil side. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents and have also gone through the material placed on record. 5. It may be pointed out at the very outset that the respondents themselves in their reply had submitted that the matter qua considering the recruits with disability pension within the definition of Ex-servicemen was under consideration of the State Government and unless the said recruits are included in the definition of Ex-servicemen they cannot be given the benefits as available to the Ex-servicemen in the matter of re-employment. 6.The note appended to para 8 of Chapter-1 of "Facilities and Concessions extended by the Government of Himachal Pradesh to the Ex-servicemen, Serving Defence Personnel and their dependents belonging to Himachal Pradesh" a Govt. 6.The note appended to para 8 of Chapter-1 of "Facilities and Concessions extended by the Government of Himachal Pradesh to the Ex-servicemen, Serving Defence Personnel and their dependents belonging to Himachal Pradesh" a Govt. of Himachal Pradesh Publication, reads as follows:- "Note: Ex-servicemen status to Ex-Recruits:- Ex-servicemen status has been granted to ex-recruits who are in receipt of pension. They are also entitled to canteen facilities including liquor (Govt. of India, Min. of Def. KSB Letter No. 2(2)/KSB/HP/A/93 dated 26.8.93). 7. The aforesaid note ambiguously provide that Ex-servicemen status has been granted to Ex-recruits who are in receipt of pension. It is not in dispute that the applicants are Ex-recruits in receipt of pension and thus in view of the above note they are clearly covered by the-definition of Ex-servicemen. Therefore, the benefits available to the Ex-servicemen under the rules in respect of securing civil employment cannot be denied to the applicants. 8. As a result, the action of the respondents in not treating the applicants as Ex-servicemen for the purposes of benefits as available to the latter in the matter of securing re-employment against civil posts is quashed and respondent No.3 is directed to sponsor names of the applicants as ex-servicemen for re-employment for the post against which their names have been registered as and when requisitioned is received in this regard. Both these original applications are disposed of in terms of the above orders with no order as to costs.