Point of Law : Petitioner had not rendered any service during this period, question of the petitioner getting any benefits for said period such as salary, promotion, etc. would not arise.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant writ petition had been filed by the petitioner challenging the acceptance of his purported resignation by the order dated 25.04.2003 w.e.f. 30.04.2003 and with a further direction that the petitioner be reinstated to his service and be granted of his all consequential benefits.

2. The fact of the instant case as would transpire from the records would show that the petitioner joined the Border Security Force (‘the BSF’, for short) as a Constable General Duty on 16.03.1989 and on 19.10.2002 an order was passed by the Commandant 64 Battalion, BSF whereby the petitioner was dismissed from the service w.e.f. 19.10.2000 on the ground that the petitioner was absent without leave w.e.f. 11.06.2000 without any reasonable cause.

3. The petitioner thereupon preferred an Appeal before the Inspector General, the Appellate Authority. The Appeal was allowed vide order dated 20.04.2002 whereby the Petitioner was reinstated and it was further observed by the Appellate Authority that necessary action be taken for regularizing the period from the date of dismissal i.e. 19.10.2000 to the date of joining against the Petitioner’s available leave. Further to that there was also a direction that the Petitioner be transferred to the 128 Bn BSF. Further to that, the 128th Bn was permitted to take disciplinary proceedings pending against the Petitioner in the 64 Bn.

4. The Petitioner thereupon rejoined his services on 10.06.2002 at the 128 Bn BSF, Patgaon. On 05.07.2002, the period of the Petitioner’s absence from 19.10.2000 to 09.06.2002 was regularized against the available leave of the Petitioner.

5. It is the Petitioner’s case that during the period from 05.07.2002 to 25.04.2003, the Commandant 128 Bn BSF harassed the Petitioner by awarding him hard duties and imposed upon him 28 days rigorous imprisonment by lodging the Petitioner in the quarter guard without any trial or inquiry and constantly pressurized the Petitioner to resign from service.

6. It is the further case of the petitioner that Commandant 64th Battalion, BSF had forced the petitioner to submit a resignation letter on 08.04.2003. The Petitioner under coercion submitted a resignation letter stating inter alia that on account of domestic problem he wanted to resign from the job voluntarily and requested that his resignation may be accepted immediately.

7. Thereupon on 25.04.2003, the resignation of the petitioner was accepted w.e.f. 30.04.2003(A/N) without pensionary benefits. The record further reveals that after one year, the petitioner preferred a Civil Suit before the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurdaspur in the State of Punjab which was registered as Civil Case No. 372/2004. By a judgment and decree dated 18.09.2007, the suit was decreed thereby declaring the order dated 30.04.2003 as null and void and the respondents herein who were the defendants in the said suit were directed to allow the plaintiff i.e. the petitioner herein to give voluntary retirement and also direct to release the Retiral benefits to the petitioner as per Rules.

8. The said judgment and decree dated 18.09.2007 passed in Civil Case No. 372/2004 was put to challenge by the Respondents before the District Judge, Gurdaspur which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 21/2008. The learned District Judge by a judgment and order dated 03.08.2009 did not decide the appeal on merit but held that there was no territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court to entertain the dispute. Accordingly, the parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court on 10.08.2009 with a further direction to the Trial Court to return the Plaint to the Petitioner under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

9. It further reveals that pursuant thereto, the petitioner preferred a Civil Writ Petition No. 14888/2010 before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the order dated 30.04.2003. The said writ petition however dismissed vide an order dated 20.08.2010 on the ground of terri