JUDGMENT R.K. Mahajan, J.
1. The pivotal question involved in this petition for determination by the Court is as to whether an airman who was initially appointed in the indian Air Force for a term of 15 years, successfully completed the term of 15 years, thereafter was granted extension of six years and served for four years and 330 days in the extended period and thereafter who took discharge on transfer to pension establishment would be entitled to get benefits of ex-servicemen quota in the services of State Government of U. P.?
2. According to the petitioner, he joined indian Air Force as an Airman on 25.11.1974 for a term of 15 years which he completed on 24.11.1989. Thereafter he opted for extension of six years and after serving for 4 years and 330 days in the extended period, he took discharge on 20.10.1994 and thus the total service rendered by the petitioner in Air Force was 19 years 10 months 26 days. His work and conduct has been exemplary.
3. Pursuant to an advertisement published in 'Employment News' dated 31.12.1994, petitioner applied for the Combined State/Upper Subordinate Services, 1994 Examinations in the reserved quota for Ex-servicemen under U. P. Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Ex-servicemen) Act, 1993. The petitioner was allowed to appear in preliminary examination which was held on 18.2.1996 and he qualified it. Thereafter he was allowed to appear in the main examination which was held between 29.6.1996 to 2.7.1996." He qualified it also. Then he was called for interview and was interviewed in November, 1996. Ultimately, he was selected and his rank was declared as 316 as averred in para 7 of the writ petition as against total 388 posts.
4. The main grievance of the petitioner is that no appointment letter was issued to him despite the fact that all relevant documents were shown by the petitioner to the respondents. All of sudden, petitioner received a letter dated 7.6.1997 cancelling his candidature from the quota of Ex-servicemen on the ground that he is not entitled to the same as he has been discharged on his own request.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that impugned cancellation of petitioner's candidature is not in accordance with the Government Orders dated 13.11.1990 and 13.10.1990 (Annexure-4) as well as the clarification issued by the Soldier Welfare Board (Annexure-5). He further submitted that petitioner is Ex-serviceman within the meaning of instructions issued by the Government of india (Annexure-6) as well as within the meaning of U. P. Act No. 4 of 1993 (Annexure-8). The petitioner has thus sought for quashing of the impugned cancellation of his candidature dated 7.6.97 (Annexure-3) received from Commission terming it to be arbitrary and illegal.
6. The respondent No. 2 controverted the allegations of the petitioner and main thrust of averment in the counter-affidavit is that since the petitioner was discharged from service at his own request, hence he cannot be entitled to the quota of Ex-servicemen and as such his candidature and selection has been rightly cancelled.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Janardan Sahai and learned counsel for the Commission Sri V. M. Sahai, we are of the view that the petition deserves to be allowed for the following reasons :
Petitioner's submission is that he is Ex-serviceman and has referred to different Notifications and recent enactments of U. P. Government. The respondents' submission is that those notifications and enactments do not cover the petitioner and even if petitioner was having pensionary benefits, he cannot be treated as Ex-serviceman when he has left the service at his own request.
8. We are unable to accept the submissions of Sri V. M. Sahai. We would like to refer the definition of term 'Ex-servicemen' as defined under U. P. Act No. 4 of 1993 as passed by the U. P. Legislature (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The term 'Ex-servicemen' is defined in clause (c) of Section 2 of the Act as follows :
"Ex-serviceman' means a person who has served in any rank, as a combatant or non-combatant, in the indian Army. Navy or Air Force, and
(i) has retired from such service after earning his pension, or
(ii) has been released from such service on medical grounds, in accordance with the requirements of such service, or because of circumstances beyond his control and has been granted medical or disability pension, or
(iii) has been released, otherwise than on his own request, as a consequence of reduction in the establishment of such service, or
(iv) has been released from such service after a fixed specific period, but has not been released on his own request or has not been dismissed or discharged on account of misconduct or inefficiency and has been granted gratuity :
and includes the following categories of territorial Army personnel who :
(i) get pension for continuous embodied service.
9. Now reference would be made to Annexure-6 to the writ petition which is letter dated 9.10.1995 issued by the Department of Personnel and Training Estt. (Reservation) Section whereby the position has been clarified in the following terms :
"It is clarified that the Armed Forces Personnel retired/released at their own request but after having earned their pension will be included in the term 'Ex-servicemen' defined for the purpose of reservation in posts in Government."
10. Annexure-7 to the writ petition is office memorandum issued by the Government of india, Ministry of Personnel. Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi. It also provides that an Ex-serviceman means a person who has served in any rank whether combatant or non-combatant in the regular Army, Navy and Air Force of the Indian Union. It's clause (iv) which is independent clause is quoted with advantage.
(iv) who has been released from such service after completing the specific period of engagements otherwise than his own request and has not been dismissed or discharged on account of misconduct or inefficiency and has been given a gratuity and includes personnel of the Territorial Army of the following namely :
(i) Pension holders for continuous embodied service.
(ii) Persons with disability attributable to military service, and
(iii) Gallantry award winners."
11. Similar language has been employed by the U. P. Legislature in its enactment quoted above. We are of the view that the intention of Legislature and Government behind the enactment and Notifications referred above is that a person who has retired from service of army after earning pension would be kept in an independent category of the persons who are included within the definition of 'Ex-servicemen'. Various categories of persons have been included in the definition of 'Ex-servicemen' and the term 'or' is used invariably between each of such categories which shows independent character of each category.
12. Sri V. M. Sahal learned counsel for the Commission submitted that even after re-employment, if a person is released on his own request, he would not be treated as Ex-serviceman. This submission is not acceptable to us. It is a matter of common experience that Ex-servicemen join civil employment when the circumstances force them to do so. The Legislature has conferred benefits by way of relaxation in age to the Ex-servicemen and also by way of their quota in the posts keeping in view the services rendered by them to the nation. They are a class in themselves. It would not be fair and proper, if narrow, pedantic and literal interpretation is given to the benevolent piece of legislation. By no stretch of imagination, the petitioner lost his character of Ex-serviceman.
13. We would like to refer to the meaning of term 'or', in P. Ramanathai Aiyar's The Law Lexicon' IInd Edition of 1997, it is stated that the word 'or' is a disjunctive particle that marks an alternative, generally corresponding to 'either'. The word 'or' is an alternative word. It is, however, not always disjunctive and is sometimes interpretative or expository of the preceding word.
14. in Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, Volume 3 fifth edition, it is stated that 'or' in prima facie an alternative word.......The word 'or' is, prime facie and in the absence of some restraining context, to be read as disjunctive and not as 'id est. ..............But sometimes 'or' connotes an independent, or original, gift.
15. In 'Words and Phrases' permanent edition volume 30, it is stated that the word 'or' used in statute Imports choice between two alternatives and as ordinarily used, means one or the other of two, but not both. The word 'or' used in a statute, is a disjunctive particle that marks an alternative. As used in its usual alternative sense, 'or' usually designates one, but not both, in its elementary sense, the word 'or' is a disjunctive particle that marks an alternative, generally corresponding to 'either' as "either this or that" ; it often connects a series of words or propositions, .presenting a choice of either.
16. Thus, in our opinion the word 'or' used in the enactment and Notifications referred and quoted above has been used in its usual alternative sense and designates one and not both and, therefore, the petitioner in the instant case having been released from the service of Air Force after earning his pension, of course, on his request during the extension period opted by him falls within the category of Ex-serviceman and is entitled to all benefits of Ex-servicemen, in our opinion, the action of Commission in refusing the benefit of Ex-serviceman to the petitioner in the instant case is arbitrary, illegal and unwarranted in view of the Notifications and enactment referred and discussed above.
17. In view of the discussions made above, we allow the writ petition and hold that the petitioner being Ex-serviceman is entitled to all benefits of Ex-servicemen admissible to such persons under law. Consequently, the impugned order dated 7.6.1997 passed by the Commission (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) is quashed and the Commission is directed to recommend the name of petitioner to Government for the post for which he has applied and has been selected and in turn, the Government will issue appointment letters in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within 4 months from today as the matter is fairly old. However, there shall be no order as to costs.