GULZAR MOHD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record of the case.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted pension under Rule 19 (2) of the B.S.F. Rules, 1969 on 10 -11 -1979. The services of the petitioner were regulated by B.S.F. Act, 1968 and the Rules, i.e. B.S.F. Rules, 1969. The. petitioner joined B.S.F. on 2 -2 -1968 at the time of National Emergency. He was continuously receiving pension since 10 -11 -1979 when suddenly on 16 -7 -2002, respondent No.4 has issued directions to stop pension being paid to B.S.F. Personnel who have resigned before completing qualifying service of 20 years. When payment of the pension being made to the petitioner was stopped. He sent a legal notice dated 23 -9 - 2002 through his advocate to respondent No.4. When no decision was taken on the legal notice, the petitioner filed CWP No. 17903 of 2002. This writ petition was disposed of on 12 -11 -2002, with a direction to the respondents to pass an appropriate speaking order on the legal notice within a period of four months from the date when the certified copy of the order is brought to the notice of the respondents. In view of the above, the respondents have now passed the impugned order dated 24 -1 -2003.

(3.) IT appears that Civil Appeal No. 6166 of 1999 Union of India v. Rakesh Kumar was pending in the Supreme Court with regard to interpretation of Rule 19. The Supreme Court has now resolved the issue in the aforesaid judgment which is reported as Union of India v. Rakesh Kumar, (2001) 4 SCO 309 : (2001 Lab IC 1406 : AIR 2001 SC 1877). The precise question which was raised before the Supreme Court was "Whether members of BSF resigning under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules, 1969, after serving for ten or more years but less than 20 years, were entitled to pension/pensionary benefits? '' After considering the entire matter. The Supreme Court has held as follows (Para 22 of Lab IC, AIR) In the result, there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that on the basis of Rule 49 of the CCS (Pension) Rules or on the basis of the GO, the respondents who have retired after completing qualifying service of 10 years but before completing qualifying service of 20 years by voluntary retirement, are entitled to get pensionary benefits. The respondents, who were permitted to resign from service under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules before the attainment of the age of retirement or before putting such number of years of service as may be necessary under the Rules, to be eligible for retirement are not entitled to get any pension under any of the provisions under the CCS (Pension) Rules. Rule 49 only prescribes the procedure for calculation and quantification of the pension amount. The GO dated 27 -12 -1995 does not confer any additional right of pension on BSF employees."