Border Security Force Personnel Dismissal Case

In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India has made a ruling in the case involving a Border Security Force personnel dismissal. The appellant had sought reinstatement after being dismissed from service, but the Division Bench’s decision has now been overturned. Stay tuned for details!


  • The appellant had 17 years of service by the date of the incident.
  • The appellant applied for leave from 10 February 2007 to 1 March 2007, which was sanctioned.
  • On 16 April 2007, he was charged with misconduct under Section 19 (b) of the BSF Act 1968.
  • The appellant contacted the Unit Adjutant for an extension of leave citing family circumstances, including the abduction of his niece.
  • The cause of misconduct arose because he rejoined his duties on 4 April 2007.
  • A statutory petition filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Director General, BSF on 13 June 2007.
  • Dismissal of appellant from service was set aside by the learned Single Judge.
  • Proceedings were remitted to the Director General of the Border Security Force for reevaluation of the punishment.
  • The Division Bench, in an appeal, reversed the decision of the learned Single Judge.
  • The Division Bench did not agree with the remittance of proceedings and reconsideration of punishment.
  • The alternate punishment to be imposed should not be dismissal or removal from service as per the Division Bench.

Also Read: Court’s Jurisdiction in Re-appraising Arbitrator’s Findings


  • Appellant contacted his Unit Adjutant for extension of leave.
  • Submitted application for extension of leave belatedly.
  • Penalized in the past for unauthorized absence without leave.
  • Has seventeen years of service.
  • Explanation for seeking further extension has not been rejected as false or incorrect.
  • The Division Bench did not condone his conduct due to belonging to a disciplined force.
  • Past conduct militates against granting an order of reinstatement in service.
  • The appellant will be treated as discharged from service after completing twenty years of pensionable service.
  • No back wages will be granted between the original dismissal date and completion of pensionable service.
  • Arrears of pension entitled to the appellant must be paid within three months.
  • Considering the appellant’s nearly seventeen years of service, a view facilitating pension after twenty years is deemed appropriate.

Also Read: Contrary Directions in Issuance of Letter of Intent


  • The appeal has been allowed.
  • No order has been given regarding costs.

Also Read: Application for Stay in Civil Suit Rejected: Court’s Legal Analysis


Case Number: C.A. No.-000086-000086 / 2020

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *