- (1.) WE find no substance in this appeal, which is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.6.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 3414 of 2000(R), by which the learned Single Judge had been pleased to dismiss the writ application filed by the petitioner - appellant herein, who had claimed Ration Allowance on his re -employment by the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
(2.) THE petitioner -appellant retired as a Sergeant from the Indian Air Force and had applied for the re -employment on the post of Typist, which was advertised by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, meant for the Ex -servicemen quota, and was selected. The petitioner -appellant was offered appointment on condition that he would draw the salary as per the Rules applicable on the employees of the Corporation and as per Clause 3.1 of a Circular, the principle was laid down for pay fixation on reemployment of the ex -servicemen, which was to be fixed at the minimum of the scale in which he joined. It is not the case of the appellant that he is drawing less salary than what he was drawing as ex - serviceman, so as to drow comparison by claiming salary, allowance and other additional allowance. Taking that into account, the learned Single Judge was pleased to reject the writ petition of the petitioner, claiming the Ration Allowance.
(3.) IN addition to the - detailed reasons assigned by the learned Single Judge for dismissing the writ petition, the fact remains that the appellant had accepted the terms and conditions of service, which was applicable on the employees of the Life Insurance Corporation of India. Hence, it is difficult to appreciate as to how the appellant can claim the Ration Allowance which he was drawing as Serviceman while he was in the Air Force. Since the Rules of the Life Insurance Corporation of India envisages payment only with regard to pay fixation and such allowances are to be granted only if he is drawing lesser pay than his previous service, the claim towards Ration Allowance could not have been entertained. The appellant, admittedly, is not drawing less salary than what he was drawing in the Air Force and hence the writ petition claiming additional payment towards Ration Allowance has rightly been rejected by the learned Single Judge.;