1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.937/2007 Dilsukh Ex.L/NK v. Union of India & Ors. Date of Order :: 12th August, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. G.R.Punia, for the petitioner. Mr. V.K.Mathur, for the respondents. .... The petitioner was enrolled as a Constable with Border Security Force on 5.9.1986 and as per the provisions of Rule 19 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1969”) he resigned from services. At first instance the Border Security Force allowed pensionary benefits to the petitioner but those were subsequently withdrawn under an order dated 29.1.1998. The respondent Border Security Force by acting upon a representation submitted by the petitioner ordered on 30.6.2006 for his re-inductment in service, accordingly he was taken on role of the Force on 11.7.2006. The period interregnum i.e. from the date of resignation to the date of re-induction was adjusted with various leaves. The Commandant, 51 Battalion, Border Security Force de-inducted the petitioner from role of the Force on 30.11.2006 by cancelling the order of re-induction dated 31.7.2006. Being aggrieved by the de-induction, the petitioner 2 preferred this petition for writ, however, during pendency of this petition another order was passed by the respondents on 21.6.2007 to recall the petitioner to join the duties. In pursuant thereto the petitioner has already joined the respondent Force again. The only contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents are required to treat the period from the date of de-induction i.e. 30.11.2006 to the date of re-induction afresh on 21.6.2007 as part of regular service. It is stated by counsel for the respondents that during the period aforesaid the petitioner has not worked with the respondents, therefore, the term is adjusted by grant of various leaves. As per the respondents the term from 1.12.2006 to 23.12.2006 is treated as part of earned leave availed, the period from 24.12.2006 to 30.12.2006 as half pay leave and the period from 31.12.2006 to 6.7.2007 is treated as extraordinary leave for 188 days. I do not find any reason to treat the period aforesaid or to say the period commencing from 31.7.2006 to 6.7.2007 as part of leave. The petitioner in pursuant to a valid order dated 20.5.2006 was re- inducted to the Force and was taken on role on 11.7.2006. The subsequent de-induction of the petitioner w.e.f. 30.11.2006 was absolutely erroneous 3 and, therefore, the term w.e.f. 30.11.2006 to the date of re-induction by recalling afresh is required to be treated as part of regular service. If the respondents be permitted to treat any part of the period above as extraordinary leave then that will amount to break in service. The petitioner in the period aforesaid remained out of duties because of the error on part of the respondents and for that he cannot be permitted to suffer adversely. The petitioner for writ is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner in continuous service from the date of his re- induction on 11.7.2006. He shall also be entitled to get all consequential benefits for the period concerned by treating him in service. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.