INSPECTOR NAFE SINGH Vs. BORDER SECURITY FORCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein joined Border Security Force (BSF) on 30. 5. 1983 as Sub-Inspector (GD ). He underwent training as Sub-Inspector (GD) with the BSF. After the completion of the said training successfully, he was sent on deputation to Delhi Police with effect from 26. 11. 1985 and was ultimately absorbed in Delhi Police as Sub-Inspector with effect from 13. 11. 1987. There were certain other persons junior to the petitioner in the BSF who also came to delhi Police on deputation in a similar manner and were absorbed in the Delhi police. From the seniority list issued by the Delhi Police, the petitioner came to know that his name is shown below to his counterparts who are junior to him in the BSF and found that the reason was that he was confirmed in BSF as Sub-Inspector with effect from 30. 5. 1986 whereas his juniors were given the confirmation orders with effect from 30. 5. 1985. In these circumstances, the petitioner made representation to the respondents to rectify the date of confirmation in his service records on the basis of his appointment and consequently he be accorded proper seniority. Since needful was not done by the respondents, the petitioner approached this Court in the form of present petition and seeks mandamus for correction of the date of confirmation in the aforesaid manner.

(2.) THE petitioner has also enclosed copy of communication dated 1. 11. 2000 received from the BSF wherein it is mentioned that the petitioner's appointment as Sub-Inspector in the service record was wrongly shown as 30. 5. 1981 which is attributed to the clerical error and the same is rectified as 30. 5. 1983. It is also mentioned that being an old case, the appointment order is not traceable. Along with that a certificate is enclosed to the effect that neither the appointment order nor the service record of the petitioner is available, being an old case.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the BSF, it is not disputed that after completion of his basic training the petitioner was promoted to the rank of NK/ro on 1. 4. 1981 and thereafter he was selected in PC (SP) with effect from 30. 5. 1983 and after completion of training he was posted to 2nd Batallion BSF on 16. 5. 1984. It is further explained that the petitioner was selected for deputation to Delhi Police vide FHQ Signal No. R/3259 dated 1. 11. 1985 under deputation terms and was permanently absorbed in Delhi Police on 13. 11. 1987. Insofar as confirmation of the petitioner in the rank of Sub-Inspector (GD) in BSF is concerned, it is mentioned that after consideration of his case, the petitioner was confirmed in the said rank on 30. 5. 1986 vide orders dated 29. 6. 1999. However, the specific averments of the petitioner that juniors to him were confirmed with effect from 30. 5. 1985 is not disputed. The BSF has also not come out with any explanation as to why the confirmation of the petitioner was delayed when his juniors were confirmed on 30. 5. 1985. The confirmation of the petitioner could be postponed only if his probation period was extended. There is no such plea or averment taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit. It is clear from the averments made in the counter affidavit itself that confirmation orders in respect of the petitioner confirming him to the rank of Sub-Inspector with effect from 30. 5. 1986 were passed only on 29. 6. 1999, i. e. much after the petitioner had ceased to be in the employment of the BSF since he was absorbed in the Delhi Police with effect from 13. 11. 1987 on permanent basis. In the letter dated 1. 11. 2000 sent by the BSF to the Deputy Commissioner of police, it is also mentioned that insofar as date of entry into the service BSF is concerned, the same was recorded wrongly in the service book and that is corrected.