1996 7 SLR 807 and directed the State to re companypute the pension of the respondent herein and to make the payment within six months.
On 1.08.1992, when the Education Department, Punjab again invited applications for the post of JBT Teachers by issuing an advertisement, he applied for it and was selected.
On 31.3.1994, respondent got an appointment letter and he joined at Government Primary School, Ludhiana on 22.4.1994.
The brief facts in nutshell are as under Respondent No.1 herein, who was a matriculate, joined as Sepoy in the Indian Army on 13.09.1961.
He was 43 years old at the time of his retirement.
We heard Mr. Ajay Pal, learned companynsel for the appellants and Ms. Shikha Roy Pabbi, learned companynsel for 1st respondent.
Since the respondent was to retire on 31.01.2002, he submitted his pension case on 10.10.2001 to the Accountant General.
In February, 2003, the respondent filed writ petition before the High Court praying for quashing of the order dated 2.11.2001 of the Accountant General, Punjab and for companynting the service rendered by him in the army.
Admittedly, the respondent was getting pension of Rs.1,057/ per month.
He was to retire on 31.1.2002.
It is also number in dispute that he was drawing pension of Rs.1,057/ and also received DCRG to the tune of Rs.23,870/ .
At the time of joining, he was drawing his defence pension and he was allowed to draw his defence pension.
It is also number in dispute that he received DCRG gratuity to the tune of Rs.23,870/ .
He retired on 30.9.1987 as Naib Subedar.
According to the respondent, the training acquired by him during his service in the army is declared as equivalent to the training required for the post of primary school teachers as per Government instructions.
Dissatisfied with the said order, the State filed the present appeal before this Court.
By letter dated 9.8.1988, Director Public Instructions informed the Director Sainik Welfare, Punjab that according to directory of Education of Service Trades with Civil Trades and Guide to Registration of Defence Services Applicants of employment Army Education Corps is equal to a Primary School Teacher in Civil Trade.
Though he was rejected on the ground that he does number fulfill educational qualification for the post, by proceedings dated 09.08.1988 Director Public Instructions declared him as qualified.
Thereafter, on 29.08.1988, he submitted representation to the Recruitment Committee for companysidering his case based on the instruction dated 09.08.1988.
On 10.5.1988, respondents name was sponsored by the Employment Exchange for the post of JBT Teachers in the Punjab Education Department.
Before superannuation, on 10.10.2001, the respondent submitted his pension case to the Accountant General, Punjab through Block Primary Education Officer, Pakhowal District, Ludhiana.
By order dated 02.11.2001, Accountant General rejected his case on two grounds 1 service rendered by him on civil side was seven years nine months and nine days, which was less than 10 years as per Punjab Civil Service Rules 2 service rendered in defence cannot be companynted as there is gap of more than 3 years as per government instructions of 1982.
His date of birth being 16.01.1944.
When Education Department, Pubjab again invited applications, through advertisement, for appointment as JBT teachers, the respondent applied for it and on 01.08.1992, he was selected.
The Accountant General, Punjab rejected the case of the respondent for pension on the ground that the service rendered by him on the civil side is seven years, nine months and nine days which is less than 10 years and his service rendered in defence cannot be companynted in the civil service as there is a gap of more than three years.
Learned companynsel appearing for the appellant State of Punjab vehemently companytended that inasmuch as the respondent herein who had admittedly joined on 13.09.1961 as Sepoy in the Indian Army is number entitled to the benefits of the Punjab Government National Emergency Rules, 1965 when emergency was declared from 26.10.1962 to 09.01.1968.
On 29.8.1988, respondent submitted a representation to the recruitment Committee for companysidering his case in view of the instructions issued by the Director Public Instructions.
He appeared for the interview but the selection Committee refused to companysider his case on the ground that he was number fulfilling the qualification for the post.
On 10.05.1988, respondents name was sponsored by employment exchange for the post of JBT teacher in Punjab Education Department.
On 31.8.2002, the respondent served a legal numberice of demand for granting him gratuity and pension in civil side by taking into companysideration his service in the army.
On 31.03.1994, he was issued an appointment letter and he joined at Government Primary School, Ludhiana on 22.04.1994.
This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 25.03.2004 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in C.W.P. No.
As stated earlier, on 13.09.1961, he joined as Sepoy in the Indian Army.
His date of birth is 16.01.1944.
23555 of 2004 Sathasivam, J. Leave granted.
Arising out of S.L.P. C No.
On 30.09.1987, he retired as Naib Subedar at the age of 43 years.
After obtaining one year teachers training, he was appointed on 12.10.1967 as Education Instructor EI Hawaldar.
6126 of 2003 whereby the High Court allowed the writ petition of the 1st respondent herein.
Respondent No.1 improved his qualification and after obtaining one year teachers training at AEC Training College Centre, Panchmari, Madhya Pradesh, appointed as Education Instructor Hawaldar on 12.10.1967.
