- (1.) THE petitioner-appellant, who had served as Deputy Commandant in the Border Security Force ('BSF'), has filed this intra-court appeal for being aggrieved of the order dated 17.03.2004 as passed in CWP No.7008/2003 whereby, the learned Single Judge of this Court has dismissed the writ petition preferred by him seeking the relief of consideration of his case for promotional post and other reliefs as regards retiral benefits.
(2.) IN brief, the relevant background aspects of the matter are that the appellant was dismissed from service while holding the post of Deputy Commandant on 10.08.1987, consequent to a disciplinary action taken against him. The appellant filed a writ petition (CWP No.883/1988) which was dismissed on 17.04.1998. However, the intra-court appeal preferred by the appellant (SAW No.563/1998) was allowed on 26.04.2000 substituting the punishment of dismissal with that of reprimand; and the order of his dismissal was quashed with all consequential monetary and service benefits. The petition for special leave to appeal filed by the respondents was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 13.11.2000. The case of the petitioner-appellant had been that another writ petition (CWP No.598/1977) was filed by him with the prayer that the services rendered by him in Army from 03.05.1964 to 31.05.1969 should be counted as the services rendered in BSF. According to the appellant, pursuant to the final order passed in such litigation, an order came to be passed on 18.10.2002 for counting of his former services in Army as the part of qualifying service for pensionary benefits in the BSF in terms of Rule 19(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 read with Rule 182 of the BSF Rules, 1969. However, before passing of this order, his case was considered for promotion as Second-in-Command and he was found unfit. Further, according to the appellant, consequent to the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench, payments were made to him but later on, a sum of Rs.2,76,054/- was wrongly recovered. The appellant made representation ventilating his grievances against denial of promotion and making of recovery and then, filed the writ petition leading to this appeal.
(3.) THOUGH several submissions have been made by the learned counsel for the parties but for the order proposed to be passed in this matter, it does not appear necessary to dilate on all the factual aspects. Suffice it to notice for the present purpose that in the impugned order dated 17.03.2004, the learned Single Judge, of course, took note of the grievance of the petitioner- appellant that his five years' service in Army had not been counted but we are unable to find a categoric finding of the learned Single Judge on this aspect. It appears that the learned Single Judge has largely relied on the want of clarification of all the factual aspects and thus, has found the appellant not entitled to the claimed reliefs. During the course of submissions, the learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court to the case of Ravi Paul & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.: (1995) 3 SCC 300 particularly paragraph 24, wherefrom it appears that so far the persons from Army, who were absorbed in or appointed to the BSF during the period 1967 to 1971, were concerned, they had been given the benefit of counting of their past service in the Army for the purpose of seniority.;