Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Banwari Lal vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 20 November, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:50338]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 142/2025
Banwari Lal S/o Shri Hansram, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of
Village Gopalpura, Post Surajgarh, District- Jhunjhunu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Deputy Secretary,
Department Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Lok
Nayak Bhawan Khan Market, New Delhi-110003.
2. The Director General Of Bsf, Hqr Dg Bsf, Block No. 10,
Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003.
3. The Inspector General Of Bsf, Frontier Hqr Bsf, Mandore
Road, Jodhpur.
4. The Commandant, 23 Battalion Border Security Force,
Through The Director General Of Bsf, Hqr Dg Bsf, Block
No. 10, Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Kshamendra Mathur
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
20/11/2025
1. The matter comes up on review petition for the order dated
30.10.2025 passed by this Court in SB Civil Writ Petition No.
15135/2021.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner's Civil Writ Petition No. 15135/2021 was allowed
on 30.10.2025, directing grant of all pensionary and
consequential benefits, and that the judgment clearly
recognized the petitioner's entitlement to pension upon
(Uploaded on 21/11/2025 at 01:00:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50338] (2 of 3) [WRW-142/2025]
retirement under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules read with Rule 49
of the CCS Pension Rules, though an inadvertent omission of
explicit reference to Rule 49 at page 10 has created
ambiguity, which may be clarified by approprietly mentioning
of the same in the order. It is contended that as a matter of
fact the same would be in consonance with the intent of the
decision of the court. It is urged that doing the above would
make the order more comprehensive.
3. A copy of the same has been supplied to the learned
counsel, Mr. Abhishek Sharma, appearing for the respondent.
He agreed with the proposition that, indeed, during the
hearing of the petition, consideration had been given to the
combined reading of Rule 19 of the BSF Rules and Rule 49(2)
(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules. Therefore, to understand
paragraph 5 at page 10, it would be more appropriate doing
so.
4. Heard.
5. Upon examining the matter in light of the submissions
advanced, this Court has revisited the record, refreshed its
recollection, and cross-checked the relevant portion with the
stenographer's diary. It stands revealed that the dictated
text--specifically the reference to "Rule 19 of the Border
Security Force Rules, 1969, framed under the BSF Act, 1968,
when read together with Rule 49(2)(b) of the CCS
(Pension) Rules, 1972" at the paragraph 5 on page 10,
was inadvertently omitted during transcription from Pitman
(Uploaded on 21/11/2025 at 01:00:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50338] (3 of 3) [WRW-142/2025]
shorthand. Considering the context of that paragraph,
wherein both resignation under Rule 19 and entitlement to
pension under Rule 49(2)(b) were simultaneously under
discussion, the omission is manifestly a clerical error
apparent on the face of the record. In the interest of justice,
the review petition thus merits acceptance to rectify the said
inadvertence.
6. Accordingly, the instant review petition is allowed. It is directed
that at page 10 in para no 5 of the order 30.10.2025 instead of
"Rule 19 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969, framed
under the BSF Act, 1968, empower....." the same is edited as
"Rule 19 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969, framed
under the BSF Act, 1968, when read together with Rule
49(2)(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 empowers...",
shall be substituted and this edited part shall be considered as
the part of the order aforesaid.
7. In order to avoid any ambiguity or anomaly arising from the
said clerical omission, and in the interest of justice, thus the
original order dated 30.10.2025 is directed to be off-loaded,
instead the corrected order dated 20.11.2025 be now uploaded
afresh. The hard copy of the original order dated 30.10.2025
be kept as "D" part in SB Civil Writ Petition No.15135/2021.
(FARJAND ALI),J
23-Mamta/-
(Uploaded on 21/11/2025 at 01:00:35 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
