IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.3616 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 09.03.2010 Surjit Singh ....Petitioner(s) vs. Union of India and anr. ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.Harinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Anjali Kukar, Advocate, for the respondents. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) A preliminary objection has been taken on behalf of the respondents that the remedy of statutory appeal is available to the petitioner under Rule 28-A of the BSF Rules, 1969 which provides that a person subject to BSF Act, who considers himself aggrieved by any order of termination of his services, may present a petition to the Director General (in case of Assistant Sub Inspector or Subordinate Officer) who may pass such orders on the petition as he deems fit. The petitioner has not availed of this remedy and, therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable in the light of the alternative efficacious remedy available to him. Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the fact about the right of statutory appeal is available to the petitioner but contends that keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the delay in preferring the appeal may not itself be taken as a ground to reject his appeal and, therefore, craves indulgence of this Court to waive off the delay which may occur in case the petitioner now prefers an appeal. He further C.W.P.No.3616 of 2009 -2- states that the appeal would be filed within a period of 15 days from today which may be considered and decided in accordance with law. Counsel for the respondents states that the petitioner should have preferred the appeal within a period of three months from the date of passing of the order, which has since expired and, therefore, after such a long delay, the permission sought for should not be granted to the petitioner. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case wherein it is the positive stand of the petitioner that he has come to know about the passing of the impugned order of dismissal from service at a very late stage, i.e. in the year 2008 and thereafter, he had preferred the present writ petition, the period spent during the pendency of this writ petition also should not be an impediment as far as the claim of the petitioner to a statutory right of filing appeal is concerned. In the light of the preliminary objection taken by the respondents that the petitioner has got remedy of filing a statutory appeal, the prayer as made by the counsel for the petitioner is allowed. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of two weeks from today. If such an appeal is preferred, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law without rejecting the same on the ground of delay. Petition stands disposed of. Copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of the Special Secretary of the Court. March 09, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE