MEGHDOOT SECURITY SERVICES Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF RESETTLEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the action of the respondent (hereafter 'DGR') in dis-empanelling the petitioner for further sponsorship as a security agency for providing services to Public Sector Undertakings and Government Establishments. The principal controversy to be addressed in the present petition is whether the impugned action of DGR is arbitrary, unreasonable and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The Central Government had formulated a policy, whereby the Public Sector Undertakings or State Owned Establishments were encouraged to engage security agencies sponsored by the DGR. This policy was formulated to rehabilitate ex-servicemen. The ex-servicemen who are interested in providing security services are empanelled by the DGR and such empanelled agencies are sponsored for providing security services to certain establishments. In order to provide for an equitable participation, sponsorship is limited to the number of security guards as specified in the policy.

(3.) The petitioner is a sole proprietorship concern of Col. T.K. Banerjee who retired from the Indian Army. Col. Banerjee applied for empanelment with the DGR after his retirement from services, his application was accepted and he (the petitioner) was empanelled as a security agency with effect from 10.04.2008. This was communicated to the petitioner by a letter dated 17.04.2008.