Failed To Retain Clerical Post In 1989, Cannot Claim Benefits Now: Meghalaya High Court To Assam Rifles Jawan

"Merely because the writ petitioner occupied the clerical post for a few months or even a year before he was assigned to the general cadre would not entitle the writ petitioner to any of the benefits that persons in clerical posts in Assam Rifles gained as a virtue of the said judgment of August 23, 2012. There could have been no other view of the matter."

The court made the observations in an judgement setting aside an order passed by single bench on December 21 in 2018 for grant of benefits to the Assam Rifles personnel. The persons occupying clerical posts in the Assam Rifles were earlier paid less than similarly positioned persons in the other Central Armed Police Forces. However, Gauhati High Court in 2012 directed the Director General Assam Rifles to bring parity in respect of the pay stricture.

The writ petitioner, who had initially inducted in Assam Rifles in or about 1987 as a clerk in the Duty Company of Assam Rifles Training Centre and School, before the Meghalaya HC sought additional benefits on basis of the 2012 judgement. However, he was made a Rifleman (General Duty) in 1988 after he failed in a written examination for retaining the post in clerical cadre. 

It was argued before the court that several other persons who had served for short durations in the clerical cadre had been given the benefit of the 2012 judgement pertaining to clerks but the petitioner had been singled out and denied the same. It was specifically argued that Assam Rifles had included even the names of "Clerks Cadre Personnel" who have put the service of three to 10 months.

However, the court took note of a submission made by the Assam Rifles that those personnel had served in the force as clerks while the petitioner was not a Clerk in the Force.

"Once it was the admitted position, as evident from the petition itself, that though the writ petitioner may have been recruited in the clerical post but the writ petitioner was thereafter re-mustered in the general cadre for the writ petitioner failing to pass the requisite examination to retain his clerical post, the writ petitioner was disentitled from claiming any benefit that came with the clerical post," said the court.

The division bench said the single bench made an error in the appreciation of facts and arrived at a wrong conclusion to confer an undeserving benefit on the petition. 

"Since the writ petitioner has severed all connections to the clerical post in Assam Rifles in or about the year 1989 and the writ petitioner continued to serve in the general cadre and gained due promotion by or about the time his writ petition was instituted, the writ petitioner could not have sought any benefit in terms of the order dated August 23, 2012," it said.

The division bench also said that the writ court fell into error in treating the petitioner on the same footing as others in the Assam Rifles who were recruited in the clerical posts and continued    on them "without being subsequently re-mustered or reassigned to any lower cadre for their failure to meet the minimum requirements of retaining the clerical post".

Case Title: The Union of India & ors. Vs. Balbir Singh Yadav

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Meg) 38 

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment