SANDEEP PANDEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was retired under Rule 26 of the Border Security Force (BSF) Rules claims pension on par with those who retired from service in accordance with Rule 49(2) of Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules.

(2.) The petitioner joined the BSF on 27.12.2000. Ext.P2 notice was issued to him on 04.06.2012 proposing his retirement on the ground that he was awarded 8 punishments during the 13 years of his service between 2001 and 2011. He was informed that in view of his consistent poor performance he was unsuitable for further retention and therefore it was proposed to retire him from service under Rule 26 of BSF Rules, 1969. Petitioner was required to furnish objection if any against the proposal within 15 days. As his explanation was not found satisfactory, Ext.P3 order was issued directing him to retire from service from 10.09.2013. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the respondents to grant pension in tune with Rule 49 (2) of CCS (Pension) Rules, on the ground that he has completed qualifying service of more than 10 years as on the date of his retirement.

(3.) The respondents filed a statement on 11.8.2014, an additional statement on 5.9.2018 and thereafter a counter affidavit. Respondents stated that compensation pension at the rate of 2/3rd of pension was sanctioned to the petitioner under Rule 40(1) of CCS (Pension) Rules as per Ext.P7 order dated 07.08.2014 produced along with I.A.No.6630/2015. He was granted compensation pension at the rate of Rs.3,500/- per month; in addition to this he was paid retirement gratuity and arrears of pension on 21.3.2015. The pension commutation amount of a sum of Rs.1,64,482/- was also sanctioned to him.