Delhi High Court
Pokhar Mal vs Union Of India And Ors. on 4 October, 2001
Equivalent citations: 96(2002)DLT352
Author: Dalveer Bhandari
Bench: Dalveer Bhandari
JUDGMENT Dalveer Bhandari, J.
1. The petitioner, who is a retired Subedar Major has approached this Court with the prayer that he may be granted honorary rank of Lieutenant w.e.f. 15.8.1994 and the honorary rank of Captain w.e.f. 26.1.1995 with all consequential benefits and payment of backwages for the aforesaid ranks which have been given to other Subedar Majors who were awarded these ranks from these dates.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he has served the India Army with distinction for 31 years. At the time of retirement the petitioner was Subedar Major and he was imminently eligible for the grant of honorary rank of Lieutenant on 15.8.1994 and the honorary rank of Captain on 26.1.1995.
3. As per sub-paras (b) & (c) of para 3 of defense Head Quarters letter N. A/62204/AG/CW 2 dated 20th August, 1982 following are the eligibility conditions for the grant of honorary commissioners:-
"(b) Should have atleast three outstanding 'Above Average' and two 'High Average' in the last five years at the time of initiation forms for the award.
(c) Should not have more than 4 rend ink entries during their service, of which not more than 2 should be in the rank of JCO. Also the last 2 years of service should be free of any red ink entry."
4. Para 5 of the said letter deals with the procedure for processing recommendation forms. Admittedly, the petitioner was fully eligible for consideration and in fact recommendations have been made in favor of the petitioner for the grant of honorary commission/rank on 10.1.1994.
5. The petitioner was sent on temporary duty on 16.3.1994 to Head Quarters 12 Artillery Brigade to give evidence at a court of inquiry held at Nasirabad in respect of certain allegations against Col. R.P.S. Yadav, ex-Commanding Officer, 5 Jat. Evidence and the court of inquiry concluded by 31.5.1994. The petitioner without any reasonable cause was kept at Nasirabad by respondents 3,4 and 5 until 8.3.1995.
6. According to the respondents the petitioner was kept there for initiating disciplinary action against him. It may be pertinent to mention that vide telegram dated 1.6.1994 the recommendation for the grant of honorary commission to the rank of Lieutenant to the petitioner was withdrawn.
7. It may be pertinent to mention that the Commandind Officer of 5 Jat, C/o 56 APO had sent a signal requesting respondent No. 5 to intimate disposal of the disciplinary case against the petitioner promptly.
8. Respondent No. 7 also sent a letter to respondent No. 5 on 15.9.1994 in which it is mentioned that it is learnt from reliable sources that the petitioner is not involved in any disciplinary case, but he is an essential witness of disciplinary case relating to the Officers and JCOs of 5 JAT. Respondent No. 5 was requested to intimate promptly regarding the petitioner's involvement in the disciplinary case as his ACR and recommendations for the grant of honorary commission are withheld in the absence of the above clarification.
9. It is stated by the petitioner that despite number of requests and reminders of respondent No. 7, respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 did not intimate that no disciplinary case was pending against he petitioner. The petitioner was detained at Nasirabad from 16.3.1994 to 8.3.1995. Immediately thereafter the petitioner on 10.3.1995 reported to the unit 5 JAT.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that no disciplinary case was ever pending against the petitioner. The petitioner has superannuated on 30.4.1995. It is abundantly clear that the petitioner's recommendation for the honorary rank of Lieutenant was withdrawn without any basis. The petitioner ought to have been considered for the grant of honorary rank of Lieutenant w.e.f. 15.8.1994 and the honorary rank of Captain w.e.f. 26.1.1995.
11. On consideration of the totality of facts and circumstances, and in the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for the grant of honorary rank of Lieutenant w.e.f. 15.8.1994, and in case the petitioner is held eligible for the grant of honorary rank of Lieutenant from 15.8.1994, then he shall also be considered for the grant of the honorary rank of Captain w.e.f. 26.1.1995, and he be given all consequential benefits of status pay, pension, gratuity and other allowances and financial benefits admissible to such honorary commissioner officers.
12. There has been considerable delay in this matter, therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner as early as possible, and in any event before 26.2.2002 so as to enable the petitioner to get the honorary rank of Lieutenant, if found eligible, on 26.1.2002.
13. The fact that the petitioner has superannuated should not come in the way of his being considered for the grant of honorary rank of Lieutenant w.e.f. 15.8.1994. The petitioner shall be considered as per his batch merit.
14. With these directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
15. In case the petitioner has any surviving grievance, then he will be at liberty to approach this Court.