MD ABDUL KADIR Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM
LAWS(SC)-2009-4-91
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: GAUHATI)
Decided on April 22,2009

MD.ABDUL KADIRANDANR Appellant
VERSUS
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R. Vs. Raveendran, J. - (1.) The Government of India formulated the Prevention of Infiltration of Foreigners Scheme (PIF Scheme for short) for Assam, for strengthening the Assam Governmental machinery for detection and deportation of foreigners in the year 1960. The scheme has been extended from time to time and is in force even now. By communication dated 3.6.1987, the Government of India infirmed the Govt. of Assam about the sanction of the following additional posts by the President under the PIF Scheme: Inspectors-5, Sub-Inspectors-323, Head Constables-306 and Constables-646. Under the said PIF Additional Scheme, the Government of India agreed to reimburse the cost of pay and allowances of persons employed in the additional posts provided all the additional posts were filled by only ex-servicemen. It also agreed to reimburse all other expenditure incurred by the State for the said Additional Scheme. The PIF Additional Scheme provided that the sanction will be valid for the period of two years from the date of its issue (3.6.1987, to be reviewed thereafter along with the main PIF Scheme.
(2.) A selection board was constituted for selection of ex- servicemen to the various posts which were sanctioned under the Additional Scheme dated 3.6.1987. The first appellant, an ex-serviceman, was selected and appointed as a sub-Inspector on 1.9.1988 after undergoing the selection process in the time scale of pay of Rs.620-25-745-EB-30- 895-EB-35-1315 plus allowances. The second appellant, also an ex-serviceman, was selected and appointed as a sub- Inspector on 17.3.1995 on a fixed basic pay of Rs. 1375/- (being the minimum in the pay scale applicable to Sub-Inspectors) plus allowances. The appointment letters issued to them by the Inspector General of Police (Border) Assam made it clear that the appointments were purely on ad hoc and temporary basis and that they could be discharged without assigning any reason or notice, in any contingency in future.
(3.) The Inspector General of Police, (Border) Assam issued a Circular dated 17.3.1995 laying down the following procedure for appointment/continuation of ex-serviceman as ad hoc Border staff : (i) All appointments shall be for a contract period of one year. (ii) Termination notice should be issued to every ad hoc employee at least 45 days before the date of expiry of one year from the date of appointment. (iii) The ad hoc employee, on receiving information regarding termination from service, shall, if he desires to continue, send an application seeking fresh appointment for a further term of one year. The application should reach the office of IGB (B, Assam at least 30 days before the date of expiry of one year. (iv) The concerned DIGP (Range)/Superintendent of Police shall send a performance report and medical certificate in respect of each ad hoc employee to whom such termination notice has been issued at least 30 days before the date of such termination while forwarding the applications for fresh appointment. (v) The applications for fresh appointment shall be considered with reference to the respective performance report and medical certificate, and those found fit and suitable will be re-appointed at least 20 days before the date of expiry of the contract period of one year. (vi) Such fresh appointment letters shall be issued by the Superintendent of Police (Border) Assam and the ad hoc employees cleared for fresh appointment shall sign an agreement and submit his joining report. (vii) If application for fresh appointment is not received in due time, it will be taken that the ad-hoc employee has not sought fresh appointment and he will not be considered for fresh appointment. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.