RA VI PAUL AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] 1 S.C.R. 419 · Decided: 19-01-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

RA VI PAUL AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
JANUARY 19, 1995 
[KULDIP SINGH, S.C. AGRAWAL AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law-Border Security Force Act, 1968-BSF-Seniority-Emer-
gency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Of-
ficers-Recruitment as Assistant Commandants after their release from the 
Anny-Claim for counting service rendered by them in the Anny for fixation 
C 
of their seniority in BSF-Whether entitled to invoke Rule B(b) of CRPF 
Rules-Held. No-Appointments/absorptions were made under BSF Act and 
executive order-Not under CRPF Rules 1955. 
Service Law-Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955-Rule 8 · (b) 
(ij- Expression 'rank'-Means rank in CRPF-Earlier army service of an D 
anny Officer or a re-employed Anny Officer-Whether can be counted for the 
purpose of seniority in the CRPF. 
Constitution of Indicr-Arts. 14 & 16-Seniority-Detennination 
of-Recruitment of ECOs/SSCOs as Assistant Commandants in BSF and E 
CRPF-CRPF and BSF governed by separate statutory provisions--Benefit of 
past service in Anny given to SSCOs in CRPF and not in BSF-Whether 
suffers from the vice of discrimination-Held No-Government not granting 
benefit of past service in Anny to SSCOs in BSF during 1974-78-Condition 
mentioned in letters of appointment-Whether discriminatory-Held. 
No-ECOs absorbed/appointed in BSF during 1967-SSCOs appointed/ab-
F 
sorbed during 1974-78--0fficers belonging to two different categories and not 
persons similarly situate. 
Service Law-Appointment as Assistant Commandmtnts in BSF in 
year 1966-67-Seniority-Ex-ECOs absorbed/appointed as Assistant Com-
G 
mandants during 1966-1971 given benefit of past service in Anny-Such a 
condition not prohibited by CRPF Rules or BSF Rules-No legal infinnity in 
fixation of seniority. 
Service law-Exercise of executive power by Government-Authority to 
recruit on basis of executive orders-Pennissible-Not obligatory to make H 
419 
420 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995) 1 S.C.R. 
A recJUitment 1Ules before Se1vice constituted--Govemment can make appoint-
ments in absence of rules. 
Hearing a Writ Petition and a Civil Ap11eal together the Supreme 
Court considered the issue of 'seniority' in the BSF. 
B 
In the wake of the Chinese aggression in 1962, in u.rder to meet the 
shortage of Commissioned Officers in the Indian Army, the Government 
of India had started a special scheme of selection of officers through 
Service Selection Board and granted them Commissions in the Indian 
Army. Such Commissioned Officers were called Emergency Commissioned 
C Officers (ECOs). In 1965, additional system of Short Service Commission 
(SSC) was introduced. 
The Border Security Force, a para military force, was constituted in 
1965. It was governed by the CRPF Rules, 1955 made under the CRPF Act, 
1949. In order to attract ECOs/SSCOs from the Army to the BSF to fulfill 
D its need for experienced officers in the BSF the Government offered that 
their service in the Army would be counted for the purpose of seniority in 
the BSF. During 1966-71 a number of ECOs were appointed as Assistant 
Commandants (ACs) in the BSF. 
On September 2 1968, Parliament enacted the BSF Act, 1968. BSF 
E (Assistant Commandments Recruitment) Rules were made in 1969 but 
\Vere repealed by the BSF (Assistant Commandments) Recruitment 
(Repeal) Rules, 1973. Thereafter, the Government of India, Ministry of 
Home Affairs' executive order dated January 16, 1974 prescribed the 
manner for recruitment to the posts of ACs in the BSF. 
F 
G 
On July 5, 1972 the Government of India indicated that the service 
in the Army was to be counted for the purpose of seniority of ex-ECOs 
appointed as DSP/Company Commander in the BSF, CRPF, ITBP and 
Assam Rifles. 
By letter dated September 6, 1972 the Government of India changed 
its recruitment and seniority policy. It constituted a Special Selection 
Board for recruitment of released SSCOs and ECOs as ACs in the ~F, 
CRPF and Assam Rifls etc. As very few applications were received wider 
publicity was requested from the Army Headquarters. It was stated that 
H the Army Service rendered as SSRCOs would not be count~d for (he 
y 
I r
-
RAVI PAUL v. U.O.I. 
421 
purpose of seniority and pension, if selected in the para military forces. A 
The letter of appointment of candidates selected thereafter also reflected 
the same position. 
Respondent No. 3 to 445 in the Civil Appeal were ECOs absorbed/ap-
pointed as A C's in BSF during 1966-71 whose pa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.