When a State Public Service Commission advertises posts with an ex-servicemen quota, do the Central Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 or the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 decide eligibility?
Coram: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha · Justice Manoj Misra
Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 — rr.2(c), 4 — Military Nursing Service Ordinance, 1943 — s.3 — Constitution of India — Art.309 — Ex-servicemen reservation — Indian Military Nursing Service — Constitution of India — Art.309 — State rules govern recruitment to State posts — Held: Eligibility for a reserved category in State recruitment is tested against the State's own rules framed under Article 309, not against Central rules confined by their terms to Central services. A central instrument outside its own field of application cannot narrow the State's definition. (¶9) Military Nursing Service Ordinance, 1943 — s.3 — Nursing Service is part of the armed forces — Held further: The Indian Military Nursing Service is raised as an auxiliary force forming part of the armed forces of the Union, its members holding commissioned rank and governed by the Army Act. It is a distinct and separate class, but it is not outside the Indian Military. (¶11, 13) Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 — r.2(c) — Purposive construction of "ex-serviceman" — Held further: A resettlement reservation must be read to its purpose, and rule 2(c), naming Military service in any rank, covers a nursing officer released on completing her engagement and paid gratuity. Exclusion of such personnel has neither textual nor purposive basis. (¶14, 18) Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 — Executive clarifications cannot override statutory rules — Held further: Clarifications issued by a welfare body administering resettlement schemes govern eligibility for those schemes alone and cannot control rules framed under Article 309. The appointment already made to the equally eligible appellant stands protected; appeal dismissed with directions. (¶19, 21, 23)
When a State Public Service Commission advertises posts with an ex-servicemen quota, do the Central Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 or the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 decide eligibility?
The State Rules decide. Under Article 309 the State regulates recruitment to its own posts, and the Punjab Rules, 1982 were framed in exercise of that power; the Central Rules, 1979 are by their own Rule 3 confined to Central Civil Services and posts, so they cannot determine eligibility for a State post.
Under the Military Nursing Service Ordinance, 1943, is the Indian Military Nursing Service part of the armed forces of the Union?
Yes. Section 3 raises the Service as an auxiliary force forming part of the armed forces of the Union for service with the Indian Military; its members are all of commissioned rank, are liable to serve only with persons subject to the Army Act, and are governed by rules and regulations made under the Ordinance. It is a distinct and separate class within, not outside, the Indian Army.
How does the purpose of an ex-servicemen reservation shape the reading of the definition in the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982?
The definition is read to its object. The reservation recognises that those who leave the armed forces are still young and capable for civil life, and their effective resettlement sustains the morale of serving personnel and the willingness of youth to enlist. Understanding that public purpose opens up the language of the rule.
Does a Short Service Commissioned officer of the Indian Military Nursing Service released on completing her engagement, with gratuity paid, fall within Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982?
Yes. Rule 2(c) covers a person who served in any rank, combatant or non-combatant, in the Military, and clause (iv) covers release on completion of the engagement period otherwise than by dismissal or discharge for misconduct, with gratuity. The officer satisfies both limbs and there is no reason to exclude Nursing Service personnel.
Can clarifications issued by the Kendriya Sainik Board exclude Nursing Service personnel from the ex-servicemen category under State rules framed under Article 309?
No. The Board's function is to formulate and implement resettlement and welfare schemes, and it may determine eligibility for those schemes, but that determination has no bearing on rules framed by the State Government under Article 309 to provide reservation in State services.
What order did the Supreme Court pass on the competing claims of the two candidates?
The appeal was dismissed and the Division Bench's view upheld: the fourth respondent qualifies as an ex-serviceman and, if otherwise eligible, must be appointed with notional benefits but no back wages. The appellant's own eligibility was never in doubt and, after uninterrupted service since December 2022, her appointment was protected from automatic termination.
Prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment.
One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
LexStreak turns the Supreme Court's output into a five-minute daily read for advocates — plain-language headnotes, the questions each judgment settles, and the full text when you need it.
Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India
Leave granted.
The short question arising for our consideration is whether the recruitment advertisement issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission inter alia providing reservation for “ex-servicemen”, would include personnel from the Indian Military Nursing Service 1.
The appellant, an ex-serviceman, having worked as Captain in the Medical Core of Indian Army, was selected and appointed under the advertisement as Extra Assistant Commissioner (Under Training) in the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch). She 1 joined service on 09.12.2022. The contesting party, respondent no. 4, was released from IMNS and also applied under the same advertisement as an ‘ex-serviceman’, but her candidature was rejected by the State on 20.05.2021 on the ground that she does not qualify under this category. Her writ petition against the rejection of her candidature was dismissed by the learned single judge, holding that IMNS personnel cannot claim reservation benefits under the “ex-servicemen” category. This decision was based on the interpretation of the Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 2. The division bench, however allowed respondent no. 4’s writ appeal by the order impugned before us. It concluded that the relevant rules governing the recruitment, i.e., the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 3 do not disqualify persons who have retired from or been released from the IMNS from claiming the benefit available to ex-servicemen. Consequently, the High Court directed that respondent no. 4, if found meritorious, be appointed forthwith and be given notional benefits of service.
Pending disposal of the Special Leave Petition filed by the appellant, this Court granted an interim order staying the 2 judgment and order passed by the High Court and as such the appellant, appointed on 09.12.2022 is continuing in service.
We have heard Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, Mr. MV Mukunda for contesting respondent no. 4, and Ms. Nupur Kumar for the State of Punjab.
Short and necessary facts are as follows. The Punjab Public Service Commission issued an advertisement on 12.12.2020 inviting applications for recruitment to number of posts under the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch). Clause 2 of the advertisement provided the number of vacancies as well as the posts for which reservation is provided. This included reservation for Ex-Servicemen (ESM) and Lineal Descendants of Ex-servicemen (LDESM) as provided for under the Punjab Rules, 1982. Note (1)(b) of Clause 11 confines the reservation only to residents of Punjab.
Rules 3 and 4 of the Punjab Rules, 1982 relate to the scope and extent of their application and reservations provided. The relevant portion of the said Rules are extracted hereinbelow for ready reference:
“Rule 3. Extent of Application. - These rules shall apply to all the State Civil Services and posts connected with the affairs of the State 3 of Punjab, except the Punjab Vidhan Sabha Secretariat Service and the Punjab Superior Judicial Service. Rule 4. Reservation of Vacancies. (1) Subject to the provision of rule 3, 13% of vacancies to be filled in by direct appointment in all the State Civil Services and posts connected with the affairs of the State of Punjab shall be reserved for being filled in by recruitment of Ex- servicemen.”
The reservation for ‘ex-servicemen’ under the advertisement must be understood as per the definition in Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Rules, 1982, which is as under:
“2. Definitions - In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires ‘Armed Forces of the Union’ means the Naval, Military and Air Forces of the Union of India; … (c)"Ex-serviceman" means a person who has served in any rank, whether as a combatant or a non-combatant, in the Naval, Military and Air Forces of the Union of India (hereinafter referred to as the Armed Forces of the Union of India), and who has, - (i) retired or released from such service at his or her own request after earning his or her pension; or (ii) has been released from such service on medical grounds attributable to military service or circumstances beyond his control and awarded medical or other disability pension; or (iii) been released, otherwise than on his own request, from such service as a result of reduction in establishment; or (iv) been released from such service after completing the specific period of engagement otherwise than at his own request or by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency and has been given a gratuity; But does not include a person who has served in the Defence Security Corps, the General Reserve Engineering Force, the 4 Lok Sahayak Sena and the Para Military Forces, but includes personnel of the Lok Sahayak Sena of the following categories, namely:- (i) pension holders for continuous embodied service. (ii) persons with disability attributable to military service; and (iii) gallantry award winners Explanation.—The persons serving in the Armed Forces of the Union, who on retirement from service would come under the category of ‘ex- serviceman’, may be permitted to apply for re-employment one year before the completion of the specified terms of engagement and avail themselves of all concessions available to ex-servicemen but shall not be permitted to leave the uniform until they complete the specified terms of engagement in the Armed Forces of the Union….”
Before we proceed further, it is necessary to clarify that the Central Rules, 1979 do not apply to the facts of the present case as the recruitment advertisement was issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission for posts under the state government. As per Article 309 of the Constitution, the state government is entitled to regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to these posts. The Punjab Rules, 1982 have been framed by the state government in exercise of this power under Article 309 read with Articles 234 and 318 of the Constitution. Further, Rule 3 of the Central Rules, 1979 (as amended in 2012 4), restricts their applicability to Central Civil Services and posts up 4 By G.S.R. 757(E) dated 04.10.2012. 5 to the level of Assistant Commandant in paramilitary forces. Therefore, the Central Rules, 1979 will not apply to determine the eligibility under “ex-servicemen” category for appointment under the advertisement issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission. In Sansar Chand Atri v. State of Punjab[^5], considering a claim for reservation as “ex-servicemen” for appointment to a post under an advertisement by the Punjab Public Service Commission, this Court relied only on interpretation of Rule 2(c) the Punjab Rules, 1982.6
In this light, the inquiry before us is whether respondent no. 4 would qualify as an “ex-serviceman” under Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Rules, 1982. In so far as the appellant is concerned, there is no doubt about her eligibility under the “ex-servicemen” category after her release from the Indian Army upon completion of service. Our enquiry is thus confined to the eligibility of respondent no. 4, who joined the MNS in 2013 as a Short Service Commissioned officer and was released on 04.09.2018, upon completion of her service period with applicable entitlement to gratuity. We will now examine the status of IMNS. 6 ibid, paras 4-7. 6
Military Nursing Service Ordinance, 1943 7 was promulgated in exercise of powers under the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935. By virtue of Article 372 of the Constitution, it continues to remain in force to this date. The “Indian Military Nursing Service” is constituted as an auxiliary force of the Indian Military and as part of the armed forces of the Union. Section 3 of the MNS Ordinance provides for the constitution of MNS in the following terms:
“Section 3. Constitution of Indian Military Nursing Service.- (1) There shall be raised and maintained, in the manner hereinafter provided, as part of the armed forces of the Union and for service with the Indian Military forces an auxiliary force which shall be designed the Military Nursing Services (India).” (emphasis supplied)
Section 4 of the MNS Ordinance, provides that: “The members of the Indian Military Nursing Service shall be liable for service only with forces and persons subject to the Army Act, 1950.” Section 5 provides that, “All members of the Indian Military Nursing Service shall be of commissioned rank and shall be appointed as officers of the Indian Military Nursing Service by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette.” Section 6 provides for eligibility 7 for appointment, Section 7 for dismissal, Section 8 on training and performance of duties, and Section 9 deals with application of the Army Act, 1911 to members of IMNS, and reads:
“Section 9. Application of Army Act and Indian Army Act, 1911 to members of Indian military Nursing Service–(1) The provisions of the Indian Army Act, 1911 shall, to extent and subject to such adaptations and modifications as may be prescribed, apply to members of the Indian Military Nursing Services as they apply to Indian commissioned officers, unless they are clearly inapplicable to women.”
12.1 Further, Sections 10 and 11 deal with the power of the Central Government and the Chief of Army Staff to make Rules and Regulations under the MNS Ordinance, respectively.
From a combined reading of these provisions, it is clear that IMNS has been constituted as a “part of the Indian military” and “part of the armed forces of the Union”. Its personnel are officers of commissioned rank, whose service and conduct are regulated by the MNS Ordinance, 1943 and certain provisions of the Army Act, 1911, Regulations made by the Chief of Army Staff, and Rules made by the Central Government. This Court in Jasbir Kaur v. Union of India[^8] has also held that the IMNS is an auxiliary force of 8 the Indian military and is a part of the Indian Army, but is a distinct and separate class in itself. 9
We will now interpret the term “ex-serviceman” as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Rules, 1982 to determine whether IMNS personnel are eligible thereunder. Before dealing with the language of the rule, it is essential to recognise its purpose and object. If we understand the significance of the policy of the State and the larger public purpose it seeks to subserve, the language of the law opens up and the interpretative journey will lead up to the right destination.
14.1 The State Government recognises the contribution of a resident of the State of Punjab by joining the armed forces of the Union. Serving the nation as part of the armed forces of the Union requires physical fitness and that has everything to do with age. As they serve and exit the armed forces, they may be spent force for military, but continue to be young and capable for civil life. Their engagement in civil society is not merely a matter of employment opportunity for ex-servicemen but also subserves the larger interest of the nation and also in building a fair and a healthy society. 9 ibid, paras 5 and 13. 9
The policy decision of the State Government is in recognition of the fact that the strength of army personnel from Punjab is about 89000 persons. 10 This accounts for 7.7% of the Army’s rank and file even though its share in the national population is 2.3%. Effective resettlement of ex-servicemen is necessary to keep the morale of the serving members of the defence forces. If the resettlement of veterans is neglected, the talented youth of the nation may not be motivated to join armed forces.
Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Rules, 1982, defines “ex-serviceman” as a person who has served in any rank, as a combatant or non- combatant, in the Naval, Military, or Air Force of the Union, and who has retired or been released from service in certain specified circumstances. Clause (iv) of the said rule is relevant for our purpose. It deals with persons who have been released from service after completing their period of engagement, otherwise than at his own request or by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency and has been given gratuity.
Respondent no. 4 squarely falls within this definition. She served as a Short Service Commissioned officer in the IMNS. Rule 2(c) specifically includes “Military”, along with Navy and Air Force, 10 ‘Punjab second among all states in contributing to Army’s rank and file’, The Tribune (March, 15, 2021). 10 and as per the MNS Ordinance, 1943 and this Court’s decision in Jasbir Kaur (supra), the IMNS is a part of the Indian Military and armed forces of the Union.
Considering the intention of the Punjab Rules, 1982 to provide employment opportunities to those who served in the armed forces, and the language of Rule 2(c) that specifically includes Military personnel, we see no reason to exclude IMNS personnel from the category of “ex-servicemen”. Further, respondent no. 4 satisfies the requirements of Clause (iv) of Rule 2(c) as she was released from service upon completion of her engagement period and was also paid gratuity.
At this stage, we find it necessary to deal with the submission made by the State of Punjab that IMNS must be excluded from “ex- servicemen” under the Punjab Rules, 1982 in view of certain clarifications dated 31.07.2019 and 10.08.2021 issued by the Kendriya Sainik Board, Ministry of Defence, Government of India to this effect. We are unable to agree with this submission as the Kendriya Sainik Board’s purpose and objective is to formulate, advise on, and implement resettlement and welfare policies for ex- servicemen and their dependents. While the Board may determine the eligibility for these schemes and policies, such determination 11 does not have any bearing on the Rules formulated by the State Government to provide reservations to ex-servicemen. The clarifications issued by the Board do not have a direct bearing on the Punjab Rules, 1982, which are formulated in exercise of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution.
In view of the above, we agree with the decision of division bench of the High Court that respondent no. 4 is eligible to claim benefit under the category of “ex-servicemen” as defined in the Punjab Rules, 1982. This is so far as respondent no. 4 is concerned.
So far as the appellant is concerned, although the High Court has not specifically dealt with her appointment, we find it necessary to clarify the position. There is no dispute that the appellant was eligible under “ex-servicemen” category. The issue arises because the appellant and respondent no. 4 are perhaps competing for the same post under this category. The appellant was appointed to the post of Extra Assistant Commissioner (Under Training) in the Punjab Civil Services on 09.12.2022 and has uninterruptedly continued in service ever since. Considering the passage of time, and her appointment and continued service in the post, we are of the opinion that it will cause great injustice to her 12 if her appointment is cancelled or set aside at this point in time. Her eligibility has not been doubted in any manner or at any time.
In view of the above discussion, we direct that respondent no. 4 qualifies as an ex-serviceman and must be considered under the “ex-servicemen” category. She is found to be meritorious. If she is otherwise eligible, she must be given an appointment. She will be entitled to notional benefits of service but will not be entitled to any backwages. We, however, clarify that the appointment of respondent No. 4 will not result in automatic termination of appellant’s service.
For the reasons stated above, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment of the High Court. The civil appeal is dismissed with directions as indicated.
The parties shall bear their own costs.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ………………………………....J. [PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA] ………………………………....J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI; APRIL 16, 2025. 13
Can a plaint be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC when limitation is a mixed question?
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 14807 OF 2024 · Supreme Court of India
Must stray dogs removed from schools and hospitals be released back to the same location?
2025 INSC 1357 · Supreme Court of India
Are the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2020 binding on a State Government issuing an aggregator licence?
2023 INSC 102 · Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court decides something every day. Read one a day.
A free account gets you the day's judgments in your practice areas, a reading streak, and folders to keep what matters.
Start reading freeHeadnote and questions prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk · Report an error · Privacy