The Kerala High Court has held that retired personnel of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) are entitled to purchase liquor through the Central Liquor Management System (CLMS) from canteens operated by other Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), such as the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and the Border Security Force (BSF). The judgment emphasised that denying this facility to retired CISF personnel—while at the same time permitting it for retirees of other CAPF wings—amounts to arbitrary discrimination in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Court heard petitions filed by the CISF Ex-Service Welfare Association and three retired CISF officers. They challenged the CISF Director General’s directive issued on 28 June 2024, which had excluded CISF retirees from the CLMS facility on grounds of policy, discipline and presumed security considerations. Before the introduction of CLMS, these retirees were issued liquor cards by the CRPF authorities in Kerala and allowed to purchase liquor from CAPF canteens.
The Court noted that the welfare and canteen regulations extended to CAPF personnel and retirees uniformly, and there was no rationale to apply a different standard for CISF retirees. It observed that all CAPF wings perform sensitive national-security functions—including CISF officers who guard airports, nuclear installations and other strategic assets. Therefore, the denial of the liquor-purchase benefit to retired CISF personnel lacked justification and offended the equality principle.
In its order, the Court set aside the June 2024 decision of the CISF DG, declaring that retired CISF personnel must be permitted to purchase liquor through the CLMS from any CAPF canteen. It directed the CISF to share the details of retired personnel with the CLMS-operating authorities of other CAPFs so as to enable compliance with the system. CRPF and other CAPF canteens were instructed to continue liquor sales to retired CISF personnel until full data integration was achieved.
The judgment reaffirms that once a benefit is accorded to a defined class of retirees in CAPFs, it cannot be withheld without valid and constitutionally permissible grounds. In this case, the exclusion of CISF retirees was held to be discriminatory and remediable. The Court’s decision ensures parity in welfare privileges across CAPF wings and removes the arbitrary distinction previously applied against retired CISF personnel.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.