CWP No.2594 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.2594 of 2007 Date of decision: 27th November, 2008 No.2445580 Ex. Sepoy Gurcharan Singh ...Petitioner Versus Union of India & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. B.S. Sehgal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ranjana Shahi, Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to grant him Reservist Pension for life as the petitioner had completed 15 years of total service taking into account his service in the Army and DSC. Alternatively, the petitioner has prayed that Special Pension be paid to him as he has served in the Indian Army as well as DSC for more than ten years. The petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army on 23rd March, 1962. He was allocated to 17th Punjab Regiment. He was demobilized from the Army and was discharged from service on 8th August, 1968. He re-enrolled in DSC on 13th October, 1967 and served the same till 31st January, 1973 when he was discharged. The claim of CWP No.2594 of 2007 2 the petitioner is based on the plea that in case his service in the Army as well as in DSC is counted, that would be more than 15 years and thus in accordance with Regulation 151, he would be entitled to Reservist Pension. Alternatively, he has prayed that Special Pension be allowed to him taking into account the fact that he had completed more than ten years of service rendered in Army as well as DSC. Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been submitted that the petitioner had absented himself w.e.f. 7th December, 1971. He was thereafter declared a deserter and Court of Inquiry was held on 21st January, 1972. He was apprehended by the civil police and handed over to unit authorities on 16.5.1972. For a total period of desertion of 162 days, he was awarded 28 days imprisonment in Military custody. Thereafter, his wife sent various applications for discharge of her husband from DSC service. He was discharged from DSC service on 1st February, 1973 (FN) on his own request. The respondents have denied that the petitioner rendered seven years of color service and eight years of reserve service, as factually incorrect. It has also been denied that the petitioner was placed in reserve due to extra strength in the Army. The respondents have averred that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of service pension as he has not rendered the mandatory minimum qualifying service of 15 years (without weightage) in terms of Rule 132 of Pension Regulations for the Army Part-I, Annexure R-4. According to the respondents, his claim for CWP No.2594 of 2007 3 Reservist Pension was also misconceived. Moreover, he was not transferred to the reserved establishment as claimed by him. In fact, he was re-enrolled in DSC and discharged from there on his own request. Thus, no reserve period of the service exists in the case of the petitioner. We have heard the counsel for the parties and have carefully considered the issues involved in the case. Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently contended that the petitioner was discharged way back in the year 1973 and he has approached this court after more than 30 years for claiming pensionary benefits. The counsel has also submitted that in view of the fact that the petitioner qualified neither for Reservist Pension nor for Special Pension, the writ petition was misconceived. We are of the considered view that the petitioner has approached this court after an inordinate delay of more than three decades. The writ petition, therefore, suffers from serious latches. However, even on merits it is clear that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as he had re-enrolled in DSC after having been discharged from the Army and thereafter he was discharged from DSC on his own request. At the time of his discharge, he was paid the service gratuity and retirement gratuity as admissible under the rules. However, service pension was denied in view of Rule 132 of the Pension Regulations for the Army Part-I, Annexure R-4. No ground is made out for grant of Reservist Pension either, as the case of the petitioner does CWP No.2594 of 2007 4 not fall in that category. We thus find no merit in the present writ petition. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE 27th November, 2008 'rajpal'