Jagran correspondent, New Delhi. On the petitions filed by various sub-inspectors of Border Security Force (BSF) regarding seniority, the full bench of Delhi High Court ruled that seniority in BSF is decided by appointment rather than selection. The court said that candidates whose appointment to BSF was delayed due to medical re-examination cannot claim seniority over batchmates who had joined earlier, even if the delay was not due to the fault of the candidates.
On the petition of Jai Mangal Rai and others, a bench of Justice C Hari Shankar, Justice Jyoti Singh and Justice Ajay Digpal ruled that as per Rule 8 of the BSF General Duty Cadre (Non-Gazetted) Recruitment Rules-2002, seniority is determined by continuous regular appointment. It refers to the date on which an officer is formally appointed and joins the service, rather than selection or medical test clearance.
The bench emphasized that Rule 8(iii) is clearly subordinate to Rule 8(ii) and applies only when candidates are appointed together. The court said that where appointments are made on different dates, seniority should be according to the order of appointment.
The court passed the said order while dismissing the petitions filed by BSF sub-inspectors recruited through the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) in 2002-03. The petitioners had sought seniority from the date their batchmates were appointed.
He had argued that the delay caused by the review medical examination caused him undue harm. A two-member bench had earlier considered this petition. However, in view of the contrary views expressed by previous benches on the same issue, the question was referred to a three-judge full bench.