Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The respondents, admittedly were in military service, during the proclamation of emergency and after release from the military service, they were appointed as Assistant Engineers, on basis of an advertisement issued by the Haryana Public Service Commission, in the year 1969. A decision had been taken by the State of Haryana to relax the minimum qualification in favour of those ex-military personnel, who had served the nation, during the emergency, while appointing to the posts of Assistant Engineer in Haryana State Engineer Service, Class II, of Public Works Department. In respect of the respondents, not only the minimum qualification prescribed for the Assistant Engineer was relaxed but they were also given seniority, taking into account the period while they were in military service in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the National Emergency Rules). The said respondents were the holders of diploma only. But in view of Rule 3 (iii) of the National Emergency Rules, on basis of the certificates granted by the appointing authority that they had acquired by experience or otherwise qualifications equivalent to those prescribed for the post of Assistant Engineers, they were appointed as Assistant Engineers although being diploma holders.

Rule 2 says that for the purpose of those rules, the expression 'military service' means enrolled or commissioned service in any of the three wings of the Indian Armed Forces (including service as a Warrant Officer) rendered by a person during the proclamation of emergency on 26.10.1962. Rule 3 (iii) with which we are concerned is as under:

"3. (iii) In case a person who has rendered military service does not possess the minimum qualifications prescribed for any service or post, he shall be deemed to possess these qualifications if the appointing authority certifies that such a person has acquired by experience or otherwise qualifications equivalent to those prescribed for that service/post."

It is the stand of the respondents that once the minimum qualification prescribed for the posts of Assistant Engineer i.e, degree was relaxed in exercise of the power under Rule 3 (iii) of the National Emergency Rules at the stage of their appointment as Assistant Engineers, it shall be deemed that their diploma was treated to be equivalent to degree. By a statutory fiction they will be deemed to be the holders of degree although in fact they were holders of diploma only and this benefit which was extended to them for having served the nation during the emergency shall be available to them till their date of superannuation. Rule 3 (iii) of National Emergency Rules says ".........................he shall be deemed to possess these qualifications if the appointing authority certifies that such a person has acquired by experience or otherwise qualifications equivalent to those prescribed for that service/post." In respect of role of a deeming clause reference was made to the several judgments pointing out hoy the Courts are required to give full effect to such statutory fiction ignoring the realities and factual position. Recently in the case of M. Venugopal v. The Divisional Manager, LIC of India, Machilipatnam, A.P., JT (1994) 1 SC 281 = [1994] 2 SCC 323, this Court after making reference to the well known case of East and Dwellings Co. Ltd. v. Finsbury Borough Council, (1952) A.C. 109 (B), pointed out that if one is bidden by a statute to treat an imaginary state of affairs as real, the Courts unless prohibited from doing so, shall also imagine as real the consequences and incidents which inevitably shall flow.

At this stage it shall be proper to determine the scope of Rule 3 (iii). Rule 3 (iii) According to us it does not purport to provide that a person who has rendered military service, although he does not possess the minimum qualification prescribed for any service or post, he shall be deemed to possess the said qualifications throughout, while in service. Reading the Rule 3 (iii) in proper context, it only provides that in case a person, who has rendered military service, does not possess the minimum qualification prescribed for any service or post, he shall be deemed to possess the qualification "if the appointing authority certifies that such a person has acquired by experience or otherwise qualifications equivalent to those prescribed for that service/post." [emphasis supplied]. In other words, on basis of the certificate of the appointing authority that such person has acquired by experience or otherwise qualifications which are equivalent to those prescribed for that service or post, such person shall be deemed to possess the qualifications in question. The words 'equivalent to those prescribed for that service or post' are relevant because on basis of the certificate granted by the appointing authority that such person was possessing equivalent qualifications to the prescribed one for the service and post, he shall be deemed to possess the qualifications prescribed. The Rule does not say that although such a person does not possess the prescribed qualifications, as he has rendered military service, it shall be deemed that he has been possessing the prescribed qualifications. According to us, on the basis of the certificate granted by the appointing authority, the concerned person shall be deemed to possess the qualifications equivalent to the qualifications prescribed for being appointed to the service and the post. It cannot be held that on basis of that certificate it shall be deemed that such a person possesses the qualifications in questions. It is well settled that a statutory fiction cannot be extended beyond the purpose. In the case of Bengal Immunity Co. v. State of Bihar, AIR (1955) SC 661 = [1955] 2 SCR 603, this Court said:-