7300 7600 1 Inspector General Rs.
5900 6700 13 Deputy Inspector General Deputy Director Rs.
The point in issue between the parties relates to the age of retirement of a Commandant Selection Grade in the Border Security Force.
1995 3 SCR 773 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MRS.
On the other hand, the appellants companytend that a Commandant Selection Grade holds the same post as a Commandant.
8000 fixed 1 Additional Director General Rs.
Hence his age of retirement is 58 years under Rule 9.
Hence the retirement age for the respondent is 55 years.
Provided that It is companytended by the respondent that at all material tunes, he was holding the post of Commandant Selection Grade which, according to him, is a rank higher than that of a Commandant.
Accordingly, the appellants sought to retire the respondent on his attaining the age of 55 years.
The companystitution and regulation of an Armed Force of the Union for ensuring the security of the borders of India and matters companynected therewith, are governed by the provisions of the Border Security Force Act, 1968.
As many as 448 officers of about the same seniority and age group joined the Border Security Force practically together, upsetting numbermal recruitment plans of a duly organised service which would numbermally recruit about 30/40 Officers per year.
SUJATA V. MANOHAR, J. Leave granted.
This was challenged by the respondent in the above writ petition where his companytentions have been upheld.
5100 6150 46 Additional Deputy Inspector General Additional Deputy Director Rs.
This is an appeal filed by the Union of India and the Director General, Border Security Force, New Delhi against a decision of the Delhi High Court dated 25.8.1994 in CWP No.
5042 of 1993 which was filed by the respondent against the appellants.
