CWP No. 17941/2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 17941/2006 Date of decision: 21.7.2008. Major B.S.Bhatia .......Petitioner vs. Union of India and others. .......Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr.Vivek Singla,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh,Central Govt. Standing Counsel for UOI. Jaswant Singh,J. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to promote him as Lieutenant Colonel in terms of instructions dated 28.10.2005 (Annexure P-1). Facts in brief are that the petitioner was commissioned on 5.7.1985 in the rank of Second Lieutenant in the Army Medical Corps (Non-technical) [for short AMC (NT)] of the Armed Forces Medical Services for five years. As provided in the Army Instructions-AI 40/73, after obtaining consent of the petitioner, his services were further extended on five years basis w.e.f. 5.7.1990, 5.7.1995 and 5.7.2000 respectively. The last extension granted was only up to 31.5.2007, as w.e.f. 5.7.2007 he CWP No. 17941/2006 2 attained the age of 55 years and in accordance with the aforesaid instructions, he was required to be superannuated. Accordingly, the petitioner was released from service on superannuation in the rank of Major on 31.5.2007. It is stated that on the recommendations of A.V. Singh committee report, President of India was pleased to revise the terms and conditions of services of the officers of Armed Forces Medical Services (AFMC) vide instruction dated 28.12.2005 (Annexure P.1) comprising of AMC, Army Dental Corps and AMC (NT) cadre and according to these instructions, AMC (NT) officers are entitled to be promoted as Lieutenant Colonel after 13 years of commissioned service. The petitioner despite his 20 years of commission service, was denied the relief, therefore, he filed his statutory complaint dated 10.3.2006 (Annexure P.2). While the decision on a statutory complaint was pending, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Respondents, upon notice, have filed the reply stating that the statutory complaint has been examined, rejected and intimated to the petitioner vide letter dated 12.12.2006 (annexure R.8). It has been further stated that terms and conditions of short service commission officers are governed by Army Instruction (AI) 40/73 and not by instruction dated 28.10.2005 (Annexure P.1). The highest rank admissible in the short commission service cadre is only the rank of Major irrespective of the length of service. It has been further stated that the grant of rank of Lt. Col to AMC (NT) officers is provided only under Army Instruction (A1) 69/76 (as amended thereafter till 10/2001), which is applicable only to permanent commission officers and not to short service commission officers. The CWP No. 17941/2006 3 Short Service Officers of the AMC (NT) cadre have become entitled to the rank of Lt. Col only w.e.f 2.11.2007 as per para 3 of letter dated 2.11.2007 (annexure R.7), attached with the written statement, which reads as under: "3. The SSC Officers granted extension shall be eligible for time scale promotions as applicable to Permanent Commissioned (PC) officers of respective cadre/service i.e AMC, AMC (NT), AD Corps and MNS to the rank of Capt, Major and Lt Col (& equivalent)." It has been further stated that as per para 9 of the guidelines for implementation of recommendations of A.V Singh committee report issued vide policy letter dated 21.12.2004 (Annexure R.9), it is specifically provided that the same are not applicable to the officers of AMC, ADC, RVC and APS. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. We are satisfied that the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the rank of Lt. Col on the basis of instruction Annexure P.1 is devoid of any merit. It is undisputed that the commission and further extension in service of the petitioner, from time to time, was given under the terms and conditions laid down AI 40/73 (as is clear from perusal of Annexures R.1,R.2 and R.3), which entitles him only to the promotion up to the rank of Major as provided in para 17 of the instruction (Annexure R.6). A perusal of the instruction dated 28.10.2005 (Annexure P.1) does not indicate that it is applicable to short service selection officers of AMC (NT). Further, the petitioner has further not disclosed as to when he passed qualifying examination part 'D' subject as provided in Annexure P.1. Still further the CWP No. 17941/2006 4 petitioner has not challenged the rejection of his statutory complaint in the present writ petition. A perusal of the instruction dated 2.11.2007 (Annexure R.7) clearly, for the first time, provides for promotion of the short services officers of AMC (NT) to the rank of Lt. Col also w.e.f 2.11.2007 only. There is no indication that these instructions have retrospective effect. The petitioner had retired by the time the instruction dated 2.11.2007 were issued. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere. Dismissed. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE July 21st , 2008 ( MEHTAB S GILL ) manoj JUDGE