DIRECTIR GENERAL BORDER SECURITY FORCE Vs. DEENAMMA SANUEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellants. Challenge in the writ appeal was to the order passed by a learned Single Judge in O.P. No.4287 of 2000. The High Court relied on some earlier decisions to hold that a person resigning under Rule 19 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 (in short 'the Rules') is entitled to pension if he is eligible. The writ appeal was dismissed and the appellants were directed to dispose of the representation of the respondent in the light of the judgment referred to i.e. Jos. Vs. Border Security Force (1999 (3) KLT 904). Relying upon this judgment, the learned Single Judge had directed the respondents in the writ petition to consider the representation of the appellant within a stipulated time.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the respondent was not eligible for pension as she had completed only 18 years and three months of service. Strong reliance is placed on a decision of this Court in Civil Appeal No.6166 of 1999 and connected cases, disposed of on 30.03.2001.