UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus RAKESH KUMAR

Citation: [2001] 2 S.C.R. 927 · Decided: 30-03-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.B. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

--, 
-> 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
RAKESH KUMAR 
MARCH 30, 2001 
[M.B. SHAH AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law : 
Bo1der Security Force Rules, 1969: Rule 19. 
Pension-MemberofBSF-Entitlement to-On JP-signation-Memberof 
C 
BSF resigned/mm his posl after serving more than ten yem:i but less than 20 
yea1:i-Held : Grant of pension to members of BSF are governed by CCS 
(Pension) Rules-A person who has resigned after more than JO years of 
qualifying service but less than 20 years is not entitled to pensionary benefits-
Rule 19 also does not make any provision for grant ofpensionary benefits to 
D 
such membPr-Iience, such member not entitled to pensiona1y bene,fits-
BorderSecurily Force Act, 1968, S. 8-Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 
J 972. R. 48-A. 
Constilution of India, 1950 : 
Article 14-Pension-Payment of-To some persons not entitled-Per-
sons sin1ilarly situated-Entitlement to-Held: Court cannot dh-ect something, 
by issuance of an app1vpriate writ, which is contrary to statutory Rules-
Ar1icle 14 has no application in such cases-A mistake should not be perpetu-
ated by direction of court-Further, court cannot direct payment of pension on 
E 
1he ground of so-called hardship. 
F 
Administrative Law : 
Administrative Instructions-Scope and ambil of-Held: Administrative 
instructions cannot amend or substitute statutory Rules-But if Rules are silent 
on a par1icular point, gaps can be filled up by administrative ins/ructions not 
G 
;nconsistent with the Rules. 
Words and l'hra<es : 
"Qualifying service"-Meaning of-In lhe context of R. 3(q) of lhe 
BOJder Securily Force Rules, !969. 
H 
927 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
928 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 2 S.C.R. 
The respondent joined the Border Security Force (BSF) as a consta-
ble and continued to serve till he submitted his resignation after rendering 
12 years and 8 months of service. His resignation was accepted under Rule 
19 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969. The appellant issued a Gov-
ernment Order (G.O.) conveying its decision in the matter of admissibility 
of pensionary benefits on acceptance of resignation under Rule 19 of the 
Rules. On the basis of the aforesaid G.O., the competent authority allowed 
rull pensionary benefits to the respondent as admissible under the Rules. 
However, as the pension was not released the respondent filed a writ 
petition before the High Court, which was allowed. Hence this appeal. 
On behalf of the appellant it was contended that neither the Border 
Security Act, 1968 nor the Rules made provision for grant of pension; and 
that grant of pension to a member of the BSF was governed by the Central 
Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972. 
On behalf of the respondent it was contended that under Rule 19 in · 
the case of acceptance or resignation of an employee after 10 years of 
senice he was entitled to get pension; that under Rule 49 the qualifying 
service for getting pension was 10 years; that on the basis of the G.O. a 
number of persons were granted pensionary benefits even though they had 
not completed 20 years of service and, therefore, the pensionary benefits < 
granted to the respondent should not he disturbed; and that the appellant 
was estopped from contending that the respondent was not entitled to get 
pensionary benefits in view of the G.O. 
The following question arose before this Court : 
Whether members or BSF who have resigned from tt.elr posts after 
serving for ten or more years but less than 20 years are entitled to pension/ 
pensionary benefits under the relevant provisions of the Border Security 
Force A~t, }968 and the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 or the Central 
Civil Services (Pen&jpn) Rules, 1972? 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. A hare reading of Section 8 of the Border Security Act, 
1968 makes it clear that no member of the Border Security Force (BSF) 
will have the right to resign except with prior permission in writing of the 
H 
prescribed authority. The language is prohibitory and the member or the 
U.0.1. v. RAKESH KUMAR 
929 
BSF is not having liberty to resign from his appointment during the term 
of his engagement. However, the prescribed authority may permit the 
member of the BSF to resign in certain special circumstances. Rule 19 of 
the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 does not create any right to pension. 
It is intended to enable members of BSF to resign from the force without 
attracting any penal consequences. (935-E] 
2.1. The Scheme of t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.