Date Of Appointment Letter, Not Date Of Joining, Decisive For Pay Fixation Benefits: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that an ex-serviceman's vested right to have his entire approved military service counted for the purpose of pay fixation cannot be defeated merely because he joined civil service after an amendment to the applicable rules came into force. The Court emphasised that the decisive factor is the date of issuance of the appointment letter and not the date of joining. It ruled that a delay in joining service, especially when permitted by the employer, cannot be used to deny benefits that were already in favour of the employee.Thus, the Court quashed the rejection order and directed that the benefit of the entire approved military service rendered by him towards fixation of pay, ignoring the amendment carried out in Rule 5(1) of the Rules 1972.Justice Sandeep Sharma remarked that: “Rightful claim of the petitioner for counting of entire military service rendered by him prior to his civil employment… cannot be permitted to be defeated on the ground that since he joined after 29.01.2018…” The petitioner, Sanjeev Kumar, after having rendered more than 15 years of approved military service in the Indian Armed Forces, appeared in the competitive examination to get civil employment i.e. Junior Clerk in the Himachal Pradesh State Cooperative Bank in the year 2017 under the ex-servicemen quota.The petitioner was issued an appointment letter in September, 2017. However, he could not join on that date due to his continued service in the Armed Forces. Thereafter, the Bank extended his date of joining till February, 2018. After the petitioner joined in February 2018, he sought fixation of pay by counting his entire approved military service. However, his request was rejected by the authorities on the grounds that the amendment to Rule 5(1), notified on 29 January 2018, restricted such benefit only to the period of service rendered after acquiring the minimum educational qualification.Case Name: Sanjeev Kumar v/s State of H.P. and others Case No.: CWP No.947 of 2023Date of Decision: 30.12.2025For the Petitioner: Mr.Neeraj Kumar Shashwat, AdvocateFor the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate, for respondents No.2 & 3.Click Here To Read/Download Order

Date Of Appointment Letter, Not Date Of Joining, Decisive For Pay Fixation Benefits: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Mehak Aggarwal

Tags