LAWS(GAU)-2011-5-43

DINESH KUMAR PRAJAPATI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On May 30, 2011
Dinesh Kumar Prajapati Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question Annexure-10 and 11 communications dated 24.07.2009 and 10.08.2009 by which the decision of the authority towards rejection of the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the cadre of Sub-Inspector (VM) was conveyed.

(2.) The petitioner entered into the services of the respondents in the year 1996 as Head Constable (VM). At the time of filing of the writ petition, he was serving as Head Constable (VM) in Sector Motor Workshop, SHQ, BSF, Shillong. Prior to 2006 there was no separate recruitment rules for Motor Transport Workshop (Non Gazetted) Grade-C post and the incumbents in the said group were governed by BSF (GD) Cadre (Non Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 2002. As per the said Rules, the requirement for promotion from the cadre of Head Constable to that of S.I. was 5 (five) years of service as Head Constable with total 18 years of service and possessing the qualifications as prescribed in the rules. As per the new recruitment rules of 2006 which provides for initial constitution of the cadre, the requirement is 10 years of regular service as Head Constable (Tech.) or 5 (five) years regular service in the grade with at least 18 years combined regular service in that grade and in any other grade in the BSF. Another requirement is to have basic training course as prescribed by the Director General from time to time.

(3.) The petitioner having had joined the services of BSF as Head Constable (VM) in the year 1996, he will be completing 18 years of service only in the year 2014. Thus, as per the requirement of 2002 Rules, he is yet to complete the requisite length of service. However, in view of the initial constitution of service with promulgation of the aforesaid Rules of 2006 he now fulfils the requirement of 10 years of continuous service in the Grade of Head Constable (VM). As regards the requirement of basic training course as prescribed by the Director General from time to time, it is on record that the petitioner has obtained the said qualification. In this connection, the petitioner has referred to Annexure-6 movement order dated 28.05.2007. The said training course was of 10 weeks duration. However, later on the BSF authority insisted for training course of 36 weeks which has again been reduced to 4 weeks as per Annexure-5 communication dated 09.04.2010 annexed to the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner.