( 1 ) THE petitioners - 610 in number, formally appointed by the Gujarat State under the Bombay Home Guards Act, 1947 and the Bombay Home Guards Rules, 1953, but really forming a special wing, known as Border Wing Home Guards (for short "bwhg") constituted under and governed by the Government of Indias Scheme of 29. 6. 1979 for all border States for border duties, have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying before this Court that this Court may direct the respondent authorities namely State of Gujarat, through the Commandant General, Home Guards Headquarters, Ahmedabad respondent No. 1, the Commandant No. 2 Battalion, Border Wing Home Guards, Bhuj - Kachchh respondent No. 2, Union of India - respondent No. 3, to evolve fair, just and reasonable conditions of service for the petitioners herein and to further grant service benefits like fixation of pay, leave, over time, medical allowance, travelling allowance, retiral benefits like provident fund, pension, gratuity etc. to the petitioners along with arrears of the above-mentioned benefits since the time of their joining.

( 2 ) THE petitioners further prayed that this Court may be pleased to declare the action of the respondents No. 1 and 2 herein of terminating the services of 428 Border Wing Home Guards personnel out of the present group of 610, as illegal, bad and unconstitutional and to direct the respondents No. 1 and 2 herein to reinstate all such petitioners in service with all consequential benefits from the date of their termination. The petitioners further prayed that this Court may issue a wit of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to declare the petitioners as permanent and full-time members of the Border Wing Home Guards and to further treat them as such by paying all consequential benefits and other reliefs in this behalf.

( 3 ) IT may be noted that, in this case, originally petition has been filed by the petitioners on 30th July, 2003, with voluminous record. The petitioners have filed affidavits on 30. 10. 2003, 28. 10. 2003, 25. 11. 2003, 2. 1. 2004, 19. 7. 2004 and 16. 12. 2004 from time to time. I have gathered facts from these affidavits of the petitioners.

( 4 ) AS regards respondents, they have also filed affidavit in reply from time to time i. e. respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed affidavit in reply dated 29. 9. 2003, 7. 10. 2003, 4. 11. 2003, 3. 12. 2003, 13. 7. 2004, and 20. 10. 2004.

( 5 ) AS regards respondent No. 3, an affidavit-in-reply has been filed by one Shri Pratap Singh, Assistant Director General, DGCD, New Delhi dated 6th December, 2004. BACKGROUND OF THE MATTER:

( 6 ) IT may be noted that, almost on identical grounds, some of the petitioners had originally filed a petition before this Court being Special Civil Application No. 9113 of 2001 along with other petitions. However, during the pendency of the petition, the learned advocate for the petitioners stated that the petitioners would like to make representation to the State Government through Commandant of Home Guards for ventilating their grievances and he seeks permission to withdraw all these petitions. However, liberty was reserved to the petitioners, if ultimately the petitioners find that the decision of the State Government is not acceptable to the petitioners. In view of the same, this petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 28. 1. 2003 (page No. 119 ). It appears that thereafter the petitioners made a detailed representation dated 31. 3. 2003 to the respondent authorities. However, during the pendency of the representation, when the respondent authority did not decide the same, however it appears that the respondent authority has tried to terminate the services of some of the Border Wing Home Guards out of group of 610, the petitioners filed present petition somewhere in July 2003. During the pendency of the petition, it appears that the representation of the