Supreme Court Holds Military Nursing Service Personnel Eligible for Ex‑Servicemen Reservation Under Punjab Rules

A bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra heard an appeal challenging whether the reservation for “ex-servicemen” in a Punjab Public Service Commission advertisement included personnel of the Indian Military Nursing Service (IMNS). The question arose after the State rejected the candidature of a former IMNS officer for appointment under the ex‑servicemen quota, a decision that was later reversed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The Court dismissed the civil appeal and held that IMNS personnel qualified as “ex‑servicemen” under Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Recruitment of Ex‑Servicemen Rules, 1982. The judges concluded that the IMNS was “part of the Indian military” and, in view of the object and language of the Punjab Rules, there was “no reason to exclude IMNS personnel” from the reservation. The Court observed that central statutes and advisory clarifications of the Kendriya Sainik Board did not displace the State’s rule‑making power under Article 309. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “From a combined reading of these provisions, it is clear that IMNS has been constituted as a ‘part of the Indian military’ and ‘part of the armed forces of the Union’. Its personnel are officers of commissioned rank, whose service and conduct are regulated by the MNS Ordinance, 1943 and certain provisions of the Army Act, 1911, Regulations made by the Chief of Army Staff, and Rules made by the Central Government. This Court in Jasbir Kaur v. Union of India has also held that the IMNS is an auxiliary force of the Indian military and is a part of the Indian Army, but is a distinct and separate class in itself.” The Court also noted that the Kendriya Sainik Board clarifications “do not have a direct bearing on the Punjab Rules, 1982”.

Background The Punjab Public Service Commission issued an advertisement dated December 12, 2020, reserving posts for Ex‑Servicemen (ESM) under the Punjab Rules, 1982. The appellant, an ex‑Army officer, was selected and appointed as Extra Assistant Commissioner (Under Training) on December 9, 2022, and continued in service. Respondent No. 4, a former Short Service Commission officer released from the IMNS on September 4, 2018 with gratuity, applied under the ESM category but had her candidature rejected by the State on May 20, 2021. A single judge upheld the rejection relying on the Central Ex‑Servicemen Rules, 1979; the High Court, however, allowed the writ appeal and directed appointment of the IMNS candidate with notional service benefits.

This Court clarified that the Central Rules, 1979 were inapplicable to recruitment to State services and that the Punjab Rules, framed under Article 309, governed eligibility. The Court analysed the MNS Ordinance, 1943 and prior precedent (Jasbir Kaur), concluded IMNS formed part of the armed forces, and interpreted Rule 2(c) to include IMNS personnel who were released after completion of engagement and given gratuity within the definition of “ex‑serviceman”. The State’s reliance on Kendriya Sainik Board circulars was rejected as not determinative of State rulemaking. The Supreme Court directed that respondent No. 4, if found meritorious, be appointed and be given notional service benefits but granted no back wages. It further clarified that such appointment would not automatically terminate the appellant’s ongoing service and denied interference with the High Court judgment; the civil appeal was dismissed and parties were directed to bear their own costs.

Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5235 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8842 of 2024) Case Title: Irwan Kour v. Punjab Public Service Commission & Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, Senior Counsel For the Respondent(s): Mr. M.V. Mukunda, Counsel for Respondent No. 4; Ms. Nupur Kumar, Advocate for State of Punjab