[2025:RJ-JD:52374]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12167/2019

Dr. Mehboob Rabbani Rolwala S/o Shri M U Rolwala, Aged About 44 Years, Presently Posted At Subsidiary Training Centre, Border

Security Force, Mandore Road, Jodhpur (Raj.).

----Petitioner

Versus

1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Home

Affairs, New Delhi - 110001.

2. The Director General, Border Security Force, Block No.

10, Lodhi Road, Cgo Complex, New Delhi- 110003.

3. The Inspector General, Border Security Force, Frontier

Headquarter, Mandore Road, Jodhpur (Raj.).

4. The Additional Director General, Medical Directorate,

Border Security Force, Block No. 10, Lodhi Road, Cgo

Complex, New Delhi- 110003.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jog Singh Bhati

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Bishnoi for

Mr. Babu Lal Bishnoi

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

04/12/2025

1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of order dated 21.05.2019 (Annexure-13) whereby the representation as filed by the petitioner for fixation/regaining of the seniority on

account of delayed promotion, stood rejected.

2. Although a challenge to order dated 22.11.2018 (Annexure- 11) has not been made in the writ petition but during the course of arguments, counsel submitted that in effect it is the date from

which the petitioner was granted the promotion that is under challenge in the present writ petition.

3. The facts are that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Commander/Medical Officer on 29.11.2005 with the BSF. 4. As per the Rules, a Medical Officer is entitled for promotion on completion of 13 years of service. But then for applicability of the said provision, an incumbent has to be in SHAPE-I medical category.

5. So far as the petitioner is concerned, he sustained several injuries on 12.11.2013 in an IED blast while he was on election duty at Chattisgarh. Because of the said injuries, the petitioner did not remain under SHAPE-I category and hence, was not entitled for promotion.

6. However, as per Instruction No.18 of Instructions dated 26.08.2002 issued by the Ministry of Home affairs (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Instructions of 2002’), a relaxation in SHAPE-I medical category was to be granted to certain categories of Central Para Military Forces (CPMF) personnel.

7. The case of the petitioner is that although he was not in SHAPE-I medical category at the first instance but after his recovery, his medical category was reviewed by the Medical Board and as per opinion of the Commandant (Medical) dated 26.10.2016 (Annexure-6), he was held eligible for promotion to the next higher rank.

8. On the medical category of the petitioner been reviewed and been found eligible, he requested to be promoted and vide order dated 22.11.2018 (Annexure-11), he was granted promotion w.e.f. 29.11.2016. It is the said date which is the bone of contention in the present petition.

9. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Instruction No.7 of the Instructions of 2002, the petitioner was to regain his seniority immediately on his promotion, that is to say, he was to be accorded promotion w.e.f. 29.11.2014 i.e. the date when he completed 09 years of service.

10. Per contra counsel for the respondents while relying upon circular dated 29.10.2008 (Annexure-R/2) submitted that although the petitioner regained his seniority but the same was subject to his having regained SHAPE-I medical category within the validity period of the recommendations of the DPC. So far as the petitioner having regained SHAPE-I medical category is concerned, the same was admittedly in the month of August 2016 and hence, he could not have been accorded promotion w.e.f. any date prior to August 2016.

11. Counsel submits that the Department is ready to amend the date from 29.11.2016 to 02.08.2016 but then, the prayer of the petitioner to be promoted w.e.f. 29.11.2014 is not tenable.

12. Heard the counsels. Perused the record.

13. The facts admitted on record are that had the petit