I.S. Tiwana, J.(Oral) - (1.) The petitioners make a grouse of the action of the respondent-authorities in not considering and selecting them for the posts of Social Studies Masters in response to an advertisement dated July 16, 19/4 (Annexure PI). As per this advertisement, 20% of the total Posts were reserved for the Released Armed Forces Personnel who joined service after 1st Nov., 1962. The petitioners claimed benefit of this reservation while making applications for the posts. Though the impugned communications (Annexures P2 to P4) though they were informed that they had not been selected on the basis of merit yet it is made clear in the affidavit of Shri Sarup Singh Kaiha, respondent No. 1, that the petitioners were not considered against the reserved quota for Released Armed Forces Personnel for the reason that they had been released from that service on compassionate grounds and according to the said Selection Committee such candidates were not entitled to the reservation in question. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties 1 find that there is no merit in this stand of the respondents.
(2.) It is the undisputed position that the said reservation had been made in terms of the Demobilised Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in the Punjab State Non-Technical Services) Rules, 1968, copy of which is Annexure P6. As per rule 3 of these Rules, 20% of non-technical posts to be filled up through direct recruitment have to be reserved for the Released Indian Armed Forces Personnel who joined service on or after 1st Nov., 1962. These Rules, however, do not define "the Released Indian Armed Forces Personnel". In the absence of any such definition it is difficult to accept the stand of the respondents that the Released Armed Forces Personnel who, though had joined after the first day of Nov., 1962, and have been released thereafter on compassionate grounds or of their own would not be considered as Released Armed Forces Personnel. No such qualification or restriction has been provided for in the Rules nor has any been brought to my notice by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. It is, thus, patent that the claim of the petitioners for being recruited against the reserved vacancies meant for the Released Armed Forces Personnel has wrongly been denied to them.
(3.) In the light of the above I quash annexures P2 to P4 and direct the respondent-authorities to consider the claim of the petitioners for recruitment to the post of Social Studies Masters against the quota reserved for the Released Armed Forces Personnel. The petitioners are also held entitled to the costs of this petition which I determine at Rs. 300. Order accordingly.;