In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... R.S.A. No.4960 of 1999 (O&M) ..... Date of decision:12.8.2011 Puran Singh .....Appellant v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL ..... 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ...... Present: Mr. R.D. Bawa, Advocate the appellant. Mr. Ranbir S. Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. ..... Mohinder Pal, J. Appellant-plaintiff Puran Singh, Chowkidar (hereinafter referred to as `the appellant') is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the first Appellate Court, whereby the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court was set aside and the suit filed by the plaintiff for mandatory injunction directing the defendants- respondents to release the plaintiff's benefits of military service towards pay, seniority, increments, proficiency step-up increments etc. from the due date in accordance with instructions contained in Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965 and Recruitment Ex. R.S.A. No.4960 of 1999 (O&M) [2] Servicemen Rules, 1982 and also pay the plaintiff Chowkidar allowance w.e.f. 1.4.1995 at the rate of `200/- per month along with interest thereon at the rate of 17% per annum was dismissed. The appellant was appointed as Chowkidar on 13.9.1976 in the Govt. High School, Sarangra, District Amritsar as an Ex-serviceman. At that time, he was working as a Chowkidar in Govt. High School, Sarai Amanat Khan, District Amritsar since 1989. It was submitted that the appellant has been discharging his duties to the satisfaction of his officers. It was further submitted that he rendered Military service for 18 years where he was enrolled on 22.12.1956 and was discharged on 20.9.1975. Though, the trial Court decreed the suit of the appellant vide judgment and decree dated 21.12.1998 by partly decreeing the suit of the appellant to the effect that the plaintiff was entitled for the benefit of military service of emergency period towards pay, increments, proficiency step-up. But the appellant was not held entitled for Chowkidara allowance and accordingly the same was declined, but the lower Appellate Court vide its judgment and decree dated 17.9.1999 reversed the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court. For reaching this conclusion, the lower appellate Court was influenced by the fact that the appellant had failed to prove that he did not join Army on the call of nation but he joined the Army as a career before the emergency was declared. The findings of the trial Court on all the issues were consequently set aside and the appeal filed by the respondents was accepted with costs. The suit before the trial Court was ordered to be set aside. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records very carefully. R.S.A. No.4960 of 1999 (O&M) [3] The only question involved in the aforesaid regular second appeal is regarding counting of period of military service of the appellant for service benefits in his present service. The appellant joined the Army on 22.12.1956. The proclamation of emergency was made on 26.10.1962 which continued upto 10.1.1968. The proclamation of second emergency was made on 3.12.1971 and it continued upto 27.3.1977. The appellant retired from the Army on 20.9.1975. In all the appellant has rendered about nine years of military service during the period of emergency and thereafter joined Education Department on 13.9.1976. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on D.B. judgment of this Court in Jang Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, 1997 (3) RSJ 464 and also on a judgment rendered by Single Bench of this Court in The Punjab State and others v. Gurbax Singh, RSA No.561 of 2005 (decided on 30.1.2009) to contend that the question involved in the instant appeal is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court as mentioned above. Learned counsel for the State of Punjab, during the course of arguments, very fairly conceded that the question involved in the instant appeal is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court rendered in Jang Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others (supra) and The Punjab State and others v. Gurbax Singh (supra). In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the State of Punjab, this regular second appeal is disposed of in the same terms as in Jang Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others (supra) and The Punjab State and others v. Gurbax Singh (supra). Resultantly, this regular second appeal is allowed and the R.S.A. No.4960 of 1999 (O&M) [4] judgment and decree of the first appellate Court are set aside and that of the learned trial Court are restored. August 12, 2011. (Mohinder Pal) Judge *hsp*