P.S. SANTHOSH KUMAR Vs. COMMANDANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant joined the CISF on 31.1.1991 and continued in service till 30.9.2004. He was discharged from service, vide Ext P1, based on the resignation submitted by him. Much later, the appellant submitted an application seeking re-enlistment in service, purportedly under Rule 58 of the CISF Rules, 1969. The request of the appellant was rejected vide Ext P6 for the reason that his request for reenlistment was not made within 90 days from the date of resignation. The Writ Petition was filed mainly on the ground that Rule 58 of the CISF Rules, does not prescribe any time limit for submitting application for re-enlistment. The prayer in the Writ Petition was to quash Ext P6 and to re-enlist the appellant in service with effect from the date on which Ext P6 order was passed.

(2.) It is an undisputed fact that the appellant stood discharged from the service of the CISF with effect from 30.9.2004. Though, the appellant had put forth a plea that he had resigned from the service due to health reasons, the plea is not supported by any reliable evidence. Moreover, in the appeal, the appellant's case is that he was forced to resign due to the litigations initiated by his wife, consequent to their matrimonial dispute. Whatever be the explanation offered by the appellant, the fact remains that he had voluntarily submitted his resignation and got discharged from the CISF.

(3.) After his discharge on 30.9.2004, the appellant sought reenlistment, by submitting Ext P2 application only on 20.7.2005. As the request was submitted before the wrong authority, Ext P3 letter was issued directing the appellant to approach the Unit Commander of his last Unit. Thereupon, the appellant submitted Ext P4 request, which was rejected by Ext P6, since the request was made almost nine months after his discharge.