IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 4652 of 2008. Decided on: 26.7.2010. __________________________________________________ Om Prakash …Petitioner. Versus H.P. SEB and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For respondents No.1 to3 : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________ V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral). The petitioner, who had joined the Indian Army on 20.12.1962, has filed and maintained the present petition for grant of the following substantive reliefs, vide para 7 (i) and (ii) of the petition: “(i) That the respondents may be directed to refix the pay of the applicant by giving him the benefit of the approved military service along with all arrears thereof. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to pay to the applicant interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum on the arrears so calculated from the ate they became due to him.” 2. The petitioner has set up the claim for grant of benefit of approved military service on the strength of the provisions of Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in the Non-Technical Services) Rules, 1972, which is opposed on 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?No. 2 behalf of the respondents on the following averments set up, vide para 1 of the legal submissions to their reply:- “1. In context, the replying respondents submit with utmost respect that the applicant herein was enrolled in the Army on 20.12.1962 and discharged on 20.9.1980. The applicant was appointed as Electrician Grade-I by the respondent Board vide memorandum dated 11.11.1982 copy of which has been annexed as A-I, against the vacancy reserved for Ex-servicemen and joined as such on 29.11.1982. The Ex- servicemen (Reservation of Vacancies in H.P. Technical Services) Rules, 1985 was notified vide office memo No. No. HPSEB (Sectt)/14-62/86-R&E- 122511-122691 dated 27.9.86 (Annexure RA/1) and made applicable in the first instance w.e.f. 19.9.1986, subsequently this date was amended to 3.5.1983 (Annexure RA-II). Therefore, the applicant Shri Om Parkash, who was appointed in the absence of Rules for technical post is not entitled to the benefits under the aforesaid Rules/Scheme as well as in the light of clarification issued vide letter No. PER (AP.II) A (3)- 2/85 dated 21.11.1986 (Annexure RA-III). Therefore, the application is not maintainable and deserve only dismissal on this score alone.” 3. The objection raised by the respondents has no force and is also not covered by the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported as State of H.P. and another versus Pyar Singh, 2002 (6) SLR 24. In this view of the matter, the case of the petitioner is fully covered under the Rules ibid as he had joined the Army service after 1.11.1962 the appointed day stipulated thereunder. 3 4. The petition is accordingly allowed along with consequential benefits which shall be payable to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by him to respondent No.1. 5. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending CMP(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of as infructuous. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. July 26, 2010. (cr)