- (1.) Dr. S.C. Mehta, PCMS (Retd.) prays for a writ of mandamus under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution directing the respondents, State of Punjab and Director, Health Services, State of Punjab (wrongly mentioned as State of Haryana) to decide the case of the petitioner for the grant of pension after taking into consideration five years' previous military service. Earlier, he approached this Court in CWP No. 1486 of 1977 which was disposed of by the Division Bench of August 29, 1977 directing the petitioner to make an application within fifteen days to the Director of Health Services, Punjab who was to dispose of the same after hearing the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Director, Health and Family Planning, Punjab with the representation, copy of which is Annexure P-1/A. He also attached an affidavit and some certificates in support of his claim. Thereafter a legal notice was also sent to the Secretary, Health Department, Government of Punjab, by Advocate of the petitioner, copy of which is Annexure P-8. A reply was sent to the petitioner by the Director, Health and Family Welfare Department, Punjab on November 29, 1984 copy Annexure P-9 requesting the petitioner to furnish the documents as asked for the time of personal hearing. Reply to this letter was sent, copy of which is Annexure P-10. The Director, Health and Family Welfare Department, Punjab, again wrote to the Advocate of the petitioner on November 3, 1985 for producing the original proof or photostat copies regarding counting of Army Service of the petitioner rendered in West Punjab prior to 21.4.1949. Reply to the same was sent, copy of which is Annexure P-13, stating that insistence on the part of the department for producing certificate of military service obtained from the Army Headquarters was not justified and the department should finalise the matter. Annexure P-14 is the letter of the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Punjab, again requesting the petitioner to supply proof of military certificate obtained from the Army Headquarters in original for disposal of the case. The stand of the petitioner in nutshell is that his military service rendered before partition could not be verified from the authorities and hence the matter should be decided under Article 915(c) of Civil Service Regulations on the basis of affidavit and other material furnished by the petitioner. This stand was taken in para 9 of the writ petition. In reply, the stand of the respondents on this part of the plea is again that the petitioner should produce certificate of approved military service from C.D.A. Allahabad. No specific reply was given for disposal of the case under Article 915(c) of the Civil Service Regulations referred to above.
(2.) Articles 915 and 916 of the Civil Service Regulations , which have been reproduced in the writ petition, read as under :- "Article 915 Except as provided in Article 916 on receipt of the formal application in form 30, the Head of the Office shall immediately prepare a statement of the applicant's service in the second page of Form 25 in accordance with the instruction embodied in Form 26 and thereafter proceed as follows :- (a) He shall go through the service book and the service roll, if any and satisfy himself whether the annual certificates of verification for the entire service are recorded therein. In respect of the unverified portion or portions of service, he shall arrange to verify them, as the case may be with reference to pay bills, acquittance rolls on other relevant records and the necessary certificates in the Service Book or service roll as the case may be. (b) If the service for any period is not capable of being verified in the manner specified in the clause (a), that period of service having been rendered by the officer of the department, a reference shall be made to the Head Officer or as the case may be, of the department in which the officer is shown to have serviced during the period for purpose of verification. (c) If any portion of the service rendered by an officer is not capable of being verified in the manner specified in the clause (a) & (b), the officer shall file affidavit in plain paper stating that he had in fact rendered that period of service and shall also furnish all relevant and evidence in support of that. The authority competent to sanction pension to that Officer shall admit that portion of service after taking into consideration the statements in the affidavit and evidence produced by that Officer in support of the same, if that authority is satisfied that the officer had really rendered that portion of service. Govt. of India's decision omitted. (omitted in view of revised at 915). Article 916 The preparation of the service statement and the verification of service in the manner set out in the preceding Article shall be undertaken by the Head of the Office one year before the date on which an Officer is due to retire on superannuation or on the date on which he proceeds on leave preparatory to retirement, whichever is earlier and shall not be delayed till the Officer has actually submitted the formal application for pensions. Govt. of India's decision omitted in view of the Article 915 of C.S.R."
(3.) A reading of Articles 915 and 916 makes it abundantly clear that where the department could not verify the previous service, the department was required to make reference to the previous department where the Government servant had rendered service as required under Article 915(b) for verification. Even if such verification could not be made, the case is required to be disposed of under Article 915(c) as reproduced above on the basis of affidavit furnished by the employee along with other relevant documents. Annexure P-2 is copy of the communication from the office of the Medical Directorate, Adjutant General's Branch, Army Headquarters, DHQ PO New Delhi, which is with reference to a letter dated October 10, 1979 written by the petitioner. This specifically mentions that in the absence of proper evidence, the Headquarters were unable to furnish certificate of verification of military service of the petitioner who was advised to take up his case with the employer in accordance with Article 915(c) of Civil Service Regulations . From this certificate, it is quite clear that the previous military service of the petitioner could not be verified by the Army Headquarters. That being the position, it was required of the respondents to decide the case of the petitioner for the grant of pension taking into consideration the previous military service in accordance with Article 915(c) of Civil Service Regulations referred to above and not to insist upon certificate of approved service from Army Headquarters.;