2025:HHC:28703 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10935 of 2025 a/w CWP No.12586 of 2025 Decided on: 25.08.2025 CWP No.10935 of 2025 Abhay Gautam … Petitioner Versus Union of India & others … Respondents CWP No.12586 of 2025 Anjali Sharma (minor) aged 17 years … Petitioner Versus Union of India & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1Yes ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner(s) : M/s Aman Parth Sharma, Rishab Negi and H.M. Thakur, Advocates, in both the petitions. For the respondents : Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondents No.1 and 3, in both the petitions. Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.2 and 6-State, in both the petitions. Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate, for respondents No.4 and 5, in both the petitions. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Pandey, Advocate, for respondent No.7, in CWP No.12586 of 2025. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) In both these petitions, similar issues of fact and law are 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:28703 involved and therefore, they are being disposed of vide common judgment. 2. The petitioners in these writ petitions are siblings, being brother and sister. They are the candidates who have participated in the NEET examination and are seeking admission in MBBS courses in the Medical Colleges in the State of Himachal Pradesh. They are seeking admission in terms of the communication issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Department of Ex- Servicemen Welfare, dated 21.05.2018, appended as Annexure P-4, with CWP No.10935 of 2025, which provides as under:- “F.No.6(1)/2017/D(Res.II) Government of India Ministry of Defence Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare Room No.237 'B' Wing Sena Bhawan, New Delhi May 21, 2018 To The Chief Secretaries/Administrators All States/UTs Subject: Inter-se priority for reservation/preference to the wards of Armed Forces personnel by States /UTs for admission to Medical/Professional/Non-Professional Courses. Approval of the Competent Authority is conveyed to the removal of Yudh Sewa Medal series of Awards i.e. Sarvottam Yudh Seva Medal, Uttam Yudh Seva Medal and Yudh Seva Medal from Category V of the priority list for 3 2025:HHC:28703 reservations/preferences to the wards of Armed Forces personnel by States/UTs/Central/State Universities/Autonomous Institutions for admission medical/professional/non-professional courses. The revised list of priorities will be as follows:- Priority 1: Widows/Wards of Defence personnel killed in action. Priority II: Wards of disabled in action and boarded out from service Priority III: Widows/Wards of Defence personnel who died while in service with death attributable to military service. Priority IV: Wards of disabled in service and boarded out with disability attributable to military service. Priority V: Wards of Ex-Servicemen and serving personnel who are in receipt of Gallantry Awards: i. Param Vir Chakra ii. Ashok Chakra iii. Maha Vir Chakra iv. Kirti Chakra v. Vir Chakra vi. Shaurya Chakra vii. Sena, Nau Sena, Vayu Sena Medal viii. Mention-in-Despatches. Priority VI: Wards of Ex-Servicemen. Priority VII: Wives of: i) defence personnel disabled in action and boarded out from service. ii) defence personnel disabled in service and boarded out with disability attributable to military service. iii) ex-Servicemen and serving personnel who 4 2025:HHC:28703 are in receipt of Gallantry Awards, Priority VIII: Wards of Serving Personnel. Priority IX: Wives of Serving Personnel. 2. This issues with the approval of Hon'ble Raksha Mantri and supersedes our earlier letters of even number dated 19.05.2017 and 30.11.2017 on the subject. (Santosh) Joint Secretary (Res.II) Tel.Tel. 23015772” 3. According to the petitioners, they are entitled for admission, in terms of contents of Annexure P-3 under Priority-III as mentioned in Communication dated 21.05.2018 (supra). Annexure P-3 reads as under:- “ISSUE CERTIFICATE REGARDING PHYSICAL CASUALTY WITH ATTRIBUTABLE TO MILITARY SERVICE 1. Refer to your letter No Nii dated 04 Jun 2024 2. Duly verified and Physical Casualty Certificate in respect of your husband No 137571881 Sep Late Jai Prakash Gautam are forwarded herwith for your information. Lt. Col. Senior Record Officer for OIC Records. Copy to:- Zila Sainik Welfare Officer for your information. Distt.-Bilaspur State- Himachal Pradesh PHYSICAL CASUALTY CERTIFICATE 5 2025:HHC:28703 It is intimated that No 13757188L Sep Late Jai Prakash Gautam had died due to "SUDDEN CARDIAC ARREST” on: 06 May 2022 during DSC service. The death has been declared as Attributable to Millitary Service. Station: C/o 56 ΑΡΟ Lt. Col. Date: 28 Jun 2024 Senior Record Officer for OIC Records.” However, according to the respondents, the petitioners are entitled for admission under Priority-VI i.e. Wards of Ex-Servicemen. 4. The petitioners are children of late Shri Jai Prakash Gautam. Jai Prakash Gautam was enrolled with the Indian Army on 26.04.1994 and he retired from the rank of Havaldar on 30.04.2020, which is the date of his discharge. Thereafter, he was again appointed as a Sepoy in the Defence Security Corp, wherein only Ex-Servicemen are appointed and he died while serving as such on 06.05.2022. 5. In terms of Annexure P-2 and P-3, appended with the writ filed by Abhay Gautam, the death of their father has been mentioned to be attributable to the military service. 6. Annexure P-2 appended with this writ petition is a communication issued by the Office of Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions), Prayagraj and Column-9 thereof reads as under:- “9. Attributable to Military Service or other wise 6 2025:HHC:28703 (ATTRIBUTABLE TO MILITARY SERVICE)” 7. Similarly, Annexure P-3 is the certificate issued by Senior Record Officer for OIC Records, dated to 28.06.2024 and it is clearly mentioned in the said certificate, which is a Physical Casualty Certificate that Sepoy Late Jai Prakash Gautam died due to sudden Cardiac Arrest on 06.05.2022 during DSC service and the death has been declared as attributable to Military Service. 8. Whereas the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the documents appended with the petition clearly demonstrate that the death of the father of the petitioners is attributable to Military Service and the denial of the consideration to the petitioners for admission under Priority-III is discriminatory. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, while referring to the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 submitted that late Havaldar Jai Prakash retired from the Indian Army on 30.04.2020 and his status as from the said date became that of an Ex-Serviceman and his subsequent re-engagement did not convert the said status, therefore, as he was an Ex-Serviceman with effect from 30.04.2020, his children will only fall under Priority-VI, which relates to the ward of Ex-Serviceman and the respondents are not denying the benefit of this priority to the petitioners. Learned Deputy Solicitor General also urged that as far as Priority-III is 7 2025:HHC:28703 concerned, the same is available only to those Military men who died while in active service on the board of the Armed Forces. According to him, herein as the unfortunate death of the father of the petitioners took place after he was discharged from the Indian Army and while he was engaged by Defence Security Corp, therefore, his death cannot be said to be attributable to the Military Service. 9. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners as also learned Deputy Solicitor General of India and have also carefully gone through the pleadings as well as the documents appended therewith. 10. Herein, the Court is dealing with the children of deceased Havaldar/Sepoy, who firstly served the Indian Army from the year 1994 to 2020 and after he was discharged from the Indian Army, he served the Defence Security Corps from the date of his engagement till he died on 06.05.2022. 11. In terms of Annexure P-4, dated 21.05.2018, nine priorities are created with regard to inter se priority for reservation/preference to the wards of Armed forces personnel by State/UTs for admission to medical/professional/non-professional courses. Priority-1 relates to widows/wards of defence personnel killed in action, Priority-II relates to wards of disabled in action and boarded out from service, Priority-III relates to widows/wards of defence personnel who died while in service with death 8 2025:HHC:28703 attributable to Military Service. Priority-VI relates to wards of Ex- Servicemen. 12. Now, here the moot issue is as to whether in the peculiar facts of these cases, can the petitioners be treated to be the wards of defence personnel who died while in service with death attributable to Military Service or not. 13. This Court is of the considered view that as Annexures P-2 and P-3, appended with CWP No.10935 of 2025, clearly demonstrate that the death of the father of the petitioners as per the employer of the late father of the petitioners, was attributable to Military Service, therefore, neither this Court nor the respondents can substitute their view for the view of the employer. 14. It is not the case of the respondents that these certificates were procured or obtained by the petitioners with the intent to gain admission in MBBS Courses. This view could have been possible had these certificates been issued by the Authorities concerned recently, but the certificates were issued in due course and the Service Book of the deceased father of the petitioners which is at Page-21 of the Paper Book and has been prepared in due course, also mentions the cause of death of the father of the petitioners as “attributable to the Military Service” in Clause-9. 15. Therefore, in these circumstances when the employer of the late father of the petitioners has itself issued certificates and 9 2025:HHC:28703 has entered into the Service Book of the deceased father of the petitioners, that his death was “attributable to the Military Service”, obviously, the petitioners are entitled to be considered under Priority-III and the act of the respondents of considering them only under Priority-VI is not sustainable in the eyes of law. There is no challenge to the certificates issued by the employer of the late father of the petitioners. Therefore, they have to be taken and accepted as they are. Respondents cannot ignore them. They cannot read the certificates so as to give a different meaning to the contents thereof other than tmentioned in the certificates. 16. Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed. The act of the respondents of not considering the petitoiners under Priority-III of Annexure P-4 is held to be bad. The respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners under Priority-III for the purpose of admission to the MBBS Courses by treating them as wards of the defence personnel, who died while is service. Taking into consideration the fact that in terms of the instructions in vogue, as is evident from Annexure P-8, appended with CWP No.10935 of 2025, only one ward of the defence personnel who died while in service, can be considered under Priority-III, it is observed that though both the petitioners will initially be considered under Priority-III, but in case both of them succeed, then the benefit will be only given to one of them on the basis of 10 2025:HHC:28703 merit or as per the options that may be exercised by the petitioners. However, the other ward obviously then would be entitled to be considered under Priority-VI, which right of the petitioners is also protected. 17. The petitions stand disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 25, 2025 (Rishi)