Indian Military Nursing Service Personnel Eligible For Civil Posts Under Ex-Servicemen Quota In Punjab : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 16) held that the personnel from the Indian Military Nursing Service (IMNS) qualify as "ex-servicemen" under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982 (“1982 Rules”) for reservation in Punjab Civil Services.

The Court noted that the 1982 Rules aim to resettle veterans, given the fact that 7.7% of Army personnel are from Punjab and excluding IMNS would undermine this objective. Therefore “effective resettlement of ex-servicemen is necessary to keep the morale of the serving members of the defence forces. If the resettlement of veterans is neglected, the talented youth of the nation may not be motivated to join armed forces.”

Interpreting the objective of the 1982 Rules, the Court observed in support of granting “ex-serviceman” status to the IMNS Personnel:

“The State Government recognises the contribution of a resident of the State of Punjab by joining the armed forces of the Union. Serving the nation as part of the armed forces of the Union requires physical fitness and that has everything to do with age. As they serve and exit the armed forces, they may be spent force for military, but continue to be young and capable for civil life. Their engagement in civil society is not merely a matter of employment opportunity for ex-servicemen but also subserves the larger interest of the nation and also in building a fair and a healthy society.”

The bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra refused to interfere with the Punjab & Haryana High Court's Division Bench ruling, which held in favor of the IMNS personnel, who were released from IMNS, recognizing them as “ex-serviceman” under the 1982 Rules.

Rule 2(c) of the 1982 Rules defines "ex-serviceman" as someone who served in the Naval, Military, or Air Forces of India and was released under specified conditions (e.g., retirement, medical discharge, or completion of service with gratuity).

The Court held that there is no justification for denying "ex-serviceman" status to personnel of the Indian Military Nursing Service (IMNS), as the IMNS is constituted as both a "part of the Indian military" and a "part of the armed forces of the Union." In support, the Court referred to Jasbir Kaur v. Union of India, (2003) 8 SCC 720, where it was affirmed that the IMNS is an auxiliary force of the Indian military, forming a component of the Indian Army, though it remains a distinct and separate class in itself.

Background

It was the case where the appellant (an ex-Army Captain) and respondent no. 4 (a released IMNS officer) competed for the same reserved post. While the appellant was appointed, respondent no. 4's candidature was initially rejected by the Single Bench but later upheld by the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court.

Aggrieved by the Division bench findings, the Appellant approached the Supreme Court claiming that the Respondent No.4 cannot be appointed on the reserved post as IMNS personnel cannot qualify as “ex-serviceman”.

Dismissing the Appellant's contention, the judgment authored by Justice Narasimha held that Respondent No. 4 cannot be denied the benefit of “ex-serviceman” status, as she had served as a short-service commission officer in the Indian Military Nursing Service (IMNS). Given that the IMNS forms part of the Indian Military and the armed forces of the Union, she is duly entitled to be recognized as an “ex-serviceman”, the court said.

“Considering the intention of the Punjab Rules, 1982 to provide employment opportunities to those who served in the armed forces, and the language of Rule 2(c) that specifically includes Military personnel, we see no reason to exclude IMNS personnel from the category of “ex-servicemen”. Further, respondent no. 4 satisfies the requirements of Clause (iv) of Rule 2(c) as she was released from service upon completion of her engagement period and was also paid gratuity.”, the court said.

Resultantly, the Court dismissed the Appeal. However, because the Appellant also qualifies as an “ex-serviceman” since she was an ex-Army Captain, the Court ordered that Respondent No. 4 must be appointed without disturbing the Appellant's position.

“In view of the above discussion, we direct that respondent no. 4 qualifies as an ex-serviceman and must be considered under the “ex-servicemen” category. She is found to be meritorious. If she is otherwise eligible, she must be given an appointment. She will be entitled to notional benefits of service but will not be entitled to any backwages. We, however, clarify that the appointment of respondent No. 4 will not result in automatic termination of appellant's service.”, the court ordered.

Case Title: IRWAN KOUR VERSUS PUNJAB PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 530

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, Sr. Adv. (Arguing Counsel) Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. Mr. Nikunj Arora, Adv. Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, AOR Mr. K S Rekhi, Adv. Ms. Elaisha Asher, Adv. Mrs. P S Vijayadharni, Adv. Mr. Arindam Sarin, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Vivek Jain, D.A.G. (Arguing Counsel) Ms. Nupur Kumar, AOR Mr. Sadiq Noor, Adv. Mr. Nishanth Patil, AOR Mr. MV Mukunda, Adv. (Arguing Counsel)