LI Network
Published on: November 02, 2023 at 00:26 IST
The Supreme Court has denied the claim of three appellants, who were Army veterans, seeking appointments as Village Development Officers in the Uttar Pradesh State Service.
The Court ruled that serving Armed Forces officers cannot be regarded as Ex-Servicemen from a prospective date.
The appellants had applied for the positions of Village Development Officers in 2016 under the category of Ex-Servicemen while still serving in the Armed Forces. They were released from the Armed Forces in 2016, but this release occurred a few months after the last application date for the post.
Although the appellants received appointment letters in 2019, the UP Subordinate Services Selection Commission later declared their appointments null and void.
They were disqualified on two grounds: firstly, they were not Ex-Servicemen at the time of application, and secondly, they did not possess the required qualifications. The appellants turned to the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court declined to intervene in the Commission’s decision.
The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, upheld the established legal position that eligibility must be determined based on the cut-off date.
The Court concluded that, at the time of the advertisement, none of the appellants could be considered Ex-Servicemen, as they were still in active service.
The Court also examined the relevant rules and clarifications related to the advertisement and found no indication that the appellants could be deemed Ex-Servicemen from a future date while they were still in service.
The Court’s decision emphasized that, in this case, there is no concept of serving personnel being deemed Ex-Servicemen, and it would not be appropriate for the Court to interpret otherwise.
The appellants argued that they were released from the Armed Forces in May 2019, the same month when their appointment letters were issued. However, the State contended that the appellants’ claim to be considered Ex-Servicemen at the time of appointment contradicted the clear terms of the advertisement, which stipulated that only Ex-Servicemen were eligible to apply.
The Court noted that interpreting the relevant rules differently would be unjust to numerous others in a similar situation as the appellants, who were not Ex-Servicemen at the time of the advertisement but later fell into that category, albeit they did not apply at the relevant time.
The Court also pointed out that circumstances could arise between the date of a certification indicating a prospective release date and the actual date of release, preventing a person from being relieved from their post. Therefore, the date mentioned in the certificate could not be considered the date of actual release from service.
The Court’s decision aligns with previous judgments on the issue, emphasizing the importance of complying with eligibility criteria as per the advertisement before the cut-off date.
The appeal was dismissed, and the Court directed that any payments made to the appellants for the period they worked as Village Development Officers should not be recovered.
Case Title: SUDHIR SINGH AND OTHERS V. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.12441 OF 2022)
