- (1.) This order will dispose of two Letters Patent Appeals 537 and 649 of 1993 which are directed against the common judgment of a learned single Judge dismissing civil writ petitions 15645 of 1990 and 5831 of 1991 whereby the claim of the writ petitioners (appellants herein) for the grant of benefit of military service for the purposes of seniority and further promotions was rejected. Facts which lie in a narrow compass are being taken from L.P.A. 537 of 1993 since the arguments were addressed only in this appeal.
(2.) The appellant while studying in B.A. responded to the clarion call given to defend the mother-land from external aggression by the Chinese and after the emergency was declared on October 26, 1962 he joined the Army and reported for pre-commissioning training on June 17, 1966 which training started on June 20, 1966. After the completion of training he was commissioned in the rank of a 2nd Lieutenant. He was released from the Army on May 21,1972 when he was holding the rank of a Captain.
(3.) Thereafter, in pursuance of an advertisement issued by the State bank of India (for short, 'the Bank') which appeared in the daily Statesman on February 23, 1973 the appellant joined the bank on on April 23, 1974 as a care-taker in the Officers 'Grade-II. it was clearly stipulated in the advertisement that preference would be given to ex-military and police officials and that the assistant security officer, caretaker would be eligible to the benefits as applicable to Officers 'Grade-II in the Bank. What is important to note here is that as per the policy of the Bank there was no reservation for the ex-Emergency Commissioned Officers/Short Service Commissioned Officers for the post of a care-taker and consequently the appellant was not appointed against any reserved post. He is presently working as Security Officer with the Bank at Jammu. His claim for the grant of benefit of military service having been rejected by the bank on the ground that there was no rule or executive order which entitled him to such a benefit he filed one of the aforesaid Writ petitions which was dismissed by the learned Judge. Hence the present appeal,;