IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.10863 of 1997 Date of Decision:- 01.02.2011 Capt.Sadhu Singh Sekhon, Deputy Director (Retd.), Transport Dept., Punjab ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Punjab and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- None for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Puri, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. *** Ranjan Gogoi, ACJ. (Oral) The petitioner had rendered Military services during the period 13.10.1963 to 1.7.1968. Thereafter, he joined as a Traffic Manager in the Transport Department of the State of Punjab on 16.1.1970. He was terminated on 3.3.1971 and reappointed on 12.12.1973. Thereafter, he continued in service to retire on 28.2.1995. On the said facts, a claim has been raised that the Military services rendered by the petitioner should be counted for pensionary benefits. The service rendered by the petitioner from 16.1.1970 to 3.3.1971 cannot be counted for the purpose of continuous service inasmuch as the petitioner was terminated and appointed afresh on 12.12.1973. It is the period of service from the said date i.e. 12.12.1973 to the date of retirement i.e. 28.2.1995 which can be counted as continuous service rendered by the petitioner. The question, therefore, is whether the C.W.P.No.10863 of 1997 -2- benefit of Military service rendered from 13.10.1963 to 1.7.1968 can be added to the period of continuous service rendered by the petitioner for the purpose of computation of pension and retiral benefits. The answer to the above question has to be in the negative in view of the provisions contained in Rule 4.6 of Volume II of Chapter 4 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules as well as Rule 4 (iii) (3) of the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules 1965. The provisions of both the Rules require that the period of break between the discharge from Army and the date of appointment in Government service should not exceed one year. In the event the said break is in excess of one year but below three years, even then, the matter can be considered by the Government having regard to the exceptional circumstances of a given case. If the break period is beyond three years, the inbuilt embargo imposed by the Rules would step in. In the present case, the break is for a period of over 5 years. In the above circumstances, no relief can be afforded to the petitioner. Writ petition consequently is dismissed. No costs. ( RANJAN GOGOI ) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE February 01, 2011 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE