SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Raj) 613

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Pradeep Nandrajog, Ramchandra Singh Jhala, JJ.
Loon Singh And Others – Appellants
Vs.
State of Rajasthan And Others – Respondents
Special Appeal (Writ) No. 801 of 2009, 769 of 2009, 770 of 2009, 771 of 2009
Decided On : 10-04-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Anirudh Khatri, Ayush Gehlot, Falgun Buch, Hemant Dutt, M.S Singhvi, Manish Shishodia, Rajesh Panwar, Sangeet Purohit, Utkarsh Singh, Advocates

Voluntary service of Home Guards cannot be termed as an employment under the State and thus they cannot claim parity in employment as permanent employees.

Headnote:

HOME GUARDS - VOLUNTARY SERVICE - REGULARIZATION OF SERVICE - RAJASTHAN HOME GUARDS ACT, 1963 - RAJASTHAN HOME GUARDS RULES, 1962 - VOLUNTARY SERVICE OF HOME GUARDS CANNOT BE TERMED AS AN EMPLOYMENT UNDER THE STATE AND THUS THEY CANNOT CLAIM PARITY IN EMPLOYMENT AS PERMANENT EMPLOYEES.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants, members of the Border Wing Home Guards of Rajasthan, filed writ petitions seeking parity with permanent whole-time Border Wing Home Guards in terms of employment, benefits, and regularization of service. They argued that they had rendered similar services as para-military forces and were entitled to the same benefits.

Finding of the Court:

The Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the appellants were not appointed under any service rules and were engaged as volunteers. The Court also held that the voluntary service of Home Guards cannot be termed as an employment under the State and thus they cannot claim parity in employment as permanent employees.

Issues: 1. Whether the appellants, members of the Border Wing Home Guards of Rajasthan, are entitled to parity with permanent whole-time Border Wing Home Guards in terms of employment, benefits, and regularization of service? 2. Whether the voluntary service of Home Guards can be termed as an employment under the State?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the appellants were not entitled to parity with permanent whole-time Border Wing Home Guards as they were not appointed under any service rules and were engaged as volunteers. 2. The Court held that the voluntary service of Home Guards cannot be termed as an employment under the State and thus they cannot claim parity in employment as permanent employees.

Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

The factual backdrop leading to filing of the present petition is that the Home Guards organization was raised in India in the erstwhile State of Bombay in the year 1946 for the purpose of assisting the police in controlling civil disturbances and communal riots. With the passage of time the service of the Home Guards was utilized throughout India for purposes as diverse as maintenance of law and order and providing help in natural calamities like floods, fires, famines etc.

2. On November 29 and 30,1966 a meeting was held in the office of Director General, Civil Defence Ministry of Affairs to discuss the organization of the Border Wing of the Home Guards in Punjab and Rajasthan. The salient features of minutes of said meeting are being noted herein under: -

"1. The DGCD welcomed the Commandants General Home Guards of the Punjab and Rajasthan and stated that the August-September 65 operations had brought out following in regard to Home Guards: -

(a) Rural Home Guards in close proximity to the Border had understandably become involved in the protection of their villages, families and properties and where warranted, in their evacuation, and had, as such, not responded to the call up notice. The response from rural Home Guards living somewhat back had on the other hand been very encouraging.

(b) There was a need for a better organised, disciplined and trained Home Guards set up in the border areas which could be mobilised quickly for use within its own border district or even elsewhere when warranted. For this purpose it should be somewhat removed from the immediate vicinity of the border.

(c) There had been a demand from the BSF organization for assistance, which though most necessary, could not be adequately provided from the existing Home Guards organization.

2. As a result of considerable discussion it was agreed that bearing in mind the need for utmost economy there was necessity to form a Border Wing of the Home Guards in the Punjab and Rajasthan with the following additional roles over and above those already laid down for the urban and rural Home Guards: -

(a) In normal times and during periods of tension on the border to assist in providing local security to border villages and thereby boost the morale of the inhabitants to stick on to their land and to pose as a deterrent against pilferage from across the border.

(b) To protect the lines of communication in times of emergency and to assist the local administration in tackling problems of internal security in the borders areas; and

(c) When required, to provide sub units as auxiliaries to the BSF in defence of the border including patrolling along the border and in fighting infiltrators.

3. It was agreed that there was a need for one Battalion of the Border Wing of the Home Guard for each of the three border districts in the Punjab and the four border districts of Rajasthan. In view of the problem of involvement of people living in close proximity to the border in the protection of their villages and possessions and therefore their likely non availability of Home Guards call up, it was further agreed that: -

(b) Along the Rajasthan border the population being more spare and in some cases not entirely reliable, this belt should be adjusted as under: -

(i) Ganganagar District. 5 to 25 miles.

(ii) Bikaner District. 20 to 45 miles.

(iii) Jaisalmer District. 25 to 50

(iv) Barmer District. 25 to 50 miles.

4. After detailed discussions the following were agreed to in regard to the organisation of these battalions: -

(a) The basic section would consist of 1 Corporal, 1 Lance Corporal and 10 Home Guards. These would be recruited as far as possible from one village. In respect of Rajasthan each section should also have 3 camels. All sections including camels would function on a part time basis. This implies that the sections would be mobilised only for



































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top