Advanced Search Results

Union of India and ors. Vs. Rakesh Kumar Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 8; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 19; Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 - Rules 3, 13, 26, 29, 35, 36, 48, 49 and 54; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 80; Fundamental Rules - Rule 56

Reported in : AIR2001SC1877; [2001(89)FLR599]; JT2001(4)SC306; 2001LabIC1406; 2001(3)SCALE150; (2001)4SCC309; [2001]2SCR927; 2001(2)SCT1085(SC); 2001(3)SLJ257(SC); (2001)2UPLBEC1163

more years but less than 20 years are entitled to pension/pensioner benefits under the relevant provisions of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BSF Act') and the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as … servant who is retired on his attaining the age of compulsory retirement. 36. Retiring Pension. A retiring pension shall be granted- (a) to a Government … General, BSF on 2nd April, 1996 for grant of pensionary benefits. Finally, after receipt of legal notice under Section 80 of CPC, the competent authority passed the following order No. 3563/(PF.RK)/97-Est.II/42328 on 3.5.1997:-'In partial modification of this

Yacub Kispotta and Others Vs. Director General BSF and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

€“ Article 311(ii) - Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Section 14 (c),Section 2I-C, Section 22, Section 23, Section 36, Section 40, Section 47, Section 48, Section 49, Section 51, Section 64, Section 70, Section 74, Section 170, … any inquiry or giving them opportunity to explain their alleged misconduct in accordance with its parent law, the Border Security Force Act, 1968 ("the Act") or the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 ( Rules ?) framed there-under. 2. The facts necessary

Shri Chandram J.M. S/O Shri Jettappa Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Rep. ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 6, 9, 10, 11, 14 to 46, 48, 48(1), 49, 50, 64, 70 and 117; Central Police Act, 1949; Army Regulations; Army Rules; Central Civil Services Pension Rules - Rule 25; Pension Rules - Rules 3 and 25; Constitution of India - Articles 22 and 311

Reported in : 2008(3)KarLJ303; 2007(6)AIRKarR441; 2008LabIC(NOC)83(Kar)

dismissed.34. Petitioner is a Member of the Border Security Force which is a paramilitary force created under the Border Security Force Act, 1968. This Force was part of Central Police Act, 1949. It was given a separate identity as Border Security … of the Force, but also for bringing disrepute to the Force which is an offence in terms of Section 40 of the Act3. Such action had been taken as a follow up on the complaint lodged by … and rejoining duties by the petitioner shall be regularised as per rules; 36. In the present case, the petitioner who had been found guilty of

S.A. Qadir Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

Reported in : 2000(2)WLN635

the appellant is that mens rea is a necessary ingredient of the offence under Section 40 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. Section 40 reads:40. Violation of good order and discipline-Any person subject to this Act who is guilty of any

Balwinder Singh Vs Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Border Security Force

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Rule 53(2) ; Sections 40, 26, 117, 53, 5575

consider the statutory position with regard to persons subjected to the Border Security Force. Section 70 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (BSF Act hereafter) provides the constitution of a Summary Security Force Court (`SSFC' hereafter). It is permitted under

Constable No. 860020697, Rama Kant Shukla Vs. Union of India Through t ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : ConstitutionService

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 117;

Reported in : 2000(1)AWC783; (2000)1UPLBEC687

petition has been filed by one Constable, Rama Kant Shukla, serving in Border Security Force. Admittedly, provisions of Border Security Force Act, 1968, are applicable to the facts of the present case. Petitioner was serving somewhere in the State of Jammu … arisen within territorial jurisdiction of this Court and secondly petitioner has an adequate and efficacious remedy available under Section 117 Border Security Force Act, 1968.6. I have heard Sri A. N. Tripathi. learned counsel for the petitioner … Chief of the Air Staff, New Delhi and others. AIR 1988 All 36. 3. Rakesh Dhar Tripathi v. Union of India and others, 1988 All

Ex. L/Nk Vimal Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 20, 26, 48, 70 and 117(2); ;Army Act; ;Army Rules - Rules 115, 115(2), 115(2A) and 125; ;Navy Act; ;Armed Forces Act; ;Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 33(2), 43, 45, 45B, 46, 48(3), 49, 51, 62, 81, 81(3), 101, 101(3), 142, 142(2) and 157; ;Border Security Force Rules, 1965 - Rules 48(3), 49(2) and 49(3); ;Constitution of India - Article 14

(hereinafter referred to 'SSFC' for brevity) finding the petitioner guilty of an offence under Section 26 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to 'BSF Act' for brevity) and the sentence of dismissal from service. The petitioner also assails

Rama Kant Shukla Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

contention of the respondent on the other hand is that there is no requirement under provisions of the Border Security Force Act and Rules thereunder for the SSFC to give reasons while giving findings of guilty or not guilty and … accused No.860020697 Const. Rama Kant Shukla of Arty Bat (HQ1011BSF Arty Regt), Charged with: CHARGE - I BSF Act 1968, Section 20 (a) ASSAULTING HIS SUPERIOR OFFICER In that he, at 2100 hrs on 21/6/95 at Gun Area Kanzalawan,

Const. Jaibir Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Rule 45; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 149, 120B

u/s 20(a) i.e. using criminal force to his superior (first charge) and Section 26 intoxication (second charge) of BORDER SECURITY FORCE Act 1968. All the three accused persons pleaded not guilty of 1st charge and guilty of 2nd charge, hence competent … and the disc. Case Record of Evidence so prepared be disposed off accordingly and BORDER SECURITY FORCE Rule 36 91) may be complied with and accordingly vide SHC BORDER SECURITY FORCE Cooch Behar further vide their O.No.1010/3/Estt/SHQ-CBR/03/13875-78

Pawanjit Singh Vs. Director General, Bsf and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Service

Acts : B.S.F. Rules, 1969 - Rule 177

Reported in : (2004)138PLR259

of the first twelve of the following questions, you will be liable to be punished provided in the Border Security Force Act, 1968.' 8. The petitioner totally ignored the warning. In such circumstances, it would be difficult for this Court to … Court by quoting irrelevant provisions of B.S.F. Act, 1968. In fact, the petitioner wilfully contravened the provisions of Sections 19 and 23 of the B.S.F Act, 1968. It is further stated that the respondents have rightly terminated … of Parshotam Lal Dhingra v. Union of India, A.I.R. 1958 Supreme Court 36. The Supreme Court has laid down.'28. ...............In short, if the termination of