HC asks Haryana to give Kargil war soldier a government post


Almost seven years after asking the government for a post in the framework of sports policy, a decorated soldier of the Kargil war and international athlete will obtain the nomination on the intervention of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

The HC Arun Monga court, ruling that the government’s decision was discriminatory, ordered the soldier to be given a job within two months based on his gender achievement.

Joginder Singh won the bronze medal for India in an international track and field competition (equivalent to the Asian Games) in Kuala Lumpur in 2006. He had to leave the army in 2007 due to vision loss. While serving in the military, he was stationed at the border where he sustained an eye injury resulting in permanent loss of vision.

Initially, he was found to be 75% visually impaired according to his forensic examination performed in June 2006 at the Institute of Medical Sciences of India (AIIMS), New Delhi.

During his 22 years of service in the Army, he received Army Praise Medals known as: 9 Year Medal, Special Service Medal, 20 Year Medal, and Medal of the Operation Vijay (Kargil War).

He applied for a government post in 2014 as part of Haryana’s sports policy. But the government continued to procrastinate on his appointment and was told to reapply in 2019 under the new policy notified in 2018, according to which he was declared of full age. Following this, he had approached the HC in 2019.

The court found that, although he was refused a job in 2014, a certain Rajesh Kumar, who had participated in the same event, had obtained a job.

“… rejecting the candidacy of one and accepting that of another, for people who are tied, exudes an element of publicity hype, perhaps nepotism and most certainly discrimination,” said the court about the government’s handling of the case. .

He also learned during the proceedings that although his application was rejected to qualify him as an adult in 2014, it was never communicated to him and he learned of the decision in 2019.

The court ruled that he was eligible for appointment in accordance with current government policy in 2013, as there was no upper age limit prescribed for nominating candidates.

The court said there was another aspect of his 70% disability. He was entitled to a special age relief benefit in accordance with the Disability Rights Act 2016.


Previous Don't allow government officials to shirk responsibility
Next Government employment an illusion for rural students

No Comment

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.