Patna High Court - Orders
Rakesh Kumar vs The Union Of India & Ors on 14 August, 2014
Author: Samarendra Pratap Singh
Bench: Samarendra Pratap Singh
Patna High Court CWJC No.13843 of 2014 (2) dt.14-08-2014 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13843 of 2014
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India & Ors
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.1, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, ASG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA
PRATAP SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 14-08-2014Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India.
The petitioner was appointed as a Constable in 32nd Battalion BSF and joined in the force on 31.1.2002. In September, 2010 options were invited from the eligible and desirous persons of BSF including those working in 32nd Battalion BSF for joining in 9th Battalion NDRF.
It is relevant to state herein that NDRF does not constitute a separate cadre but it is constituted of various personnel taken from different paramilitary and other forces to respond in situation of calamity or disaster. It is imperative that a person joining such organization should be maintaining high level of physique and mental strength.
It appears that pursuant to the option exercised by the petitioner, he was put on deputation from 32nd Battalion BSF Patna High Court CWJC No.13843 of 2014 (2) dt.14-08-2014 2 to 9th Battalion NDRF, Bihta for a period of five years which would have come to an end in January, 2016. The petitioner is aggrieved by order, dated 9.7.2014 whereby he has been relieved from 9th Battalion NDRF, Bihta to join his parent Battalion, namely, 32nd Battalion BSF, by the Directorate of BSF. The aforesaid order is in challenge in the writ petition.
It appears that the petitioner has been transferred on the ground that he is not maintaining the appropriate level of physique required for being continued in NDRF. It appears from the medical report contained in Annexure-1 dated 24.2.2012 that he has been diagnosed in category S, H, A, P2(T-12) which renders him virtually unfit to continue in NDRF. The petitioner does not dispute that he is not maintaining the level of physical fitness required for being continued in NDRF. He submits that despite medical diagnosis, he was continued in NDRF and now as the period of deputation would come to end in January, 2016, he need not be shifted.
In my view, merely because the petitioner has been permitted to over stay would not give him a ground to continue till the end of his deputation. However, I find that the petitioner has already made a representation before the Commandant, 9th Battalion NDRF, Bihta. The petitioner ought to have made a Patna High Court CWJC No.13843 of 2014 (2) dt.14-08-2014 3 representation before the Director General of BSF, New Delhi. In case, if he makes a representation before the Director General of BSF, New Delhi, respondent No.2, raising his grievance, the same would be considered within three weeks from the date of its filing. However, the petitioner must join at the place of his transfer before giving representation. The joining of the petitioner at his place of posting, pursuant to impugned letter dated 5.8.2014 would not come in the way of consideration of his representation. If the Director General finds it appropriate, he may permit the petitioner to continue at 9th Battalion NDRF, Bihta.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application stands disposed of.
(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) KHAN/-
U