Supreme Court irked over Army following two promotion policies

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took strong note of the Army following two promotion policies saying how could the Chief of Army Staff defy government order.

The court's observation came when the counsel for Ministry of Defence said that the Centre had approved the new "command exit promotion" policy but all the vacancies were not filled up by Army under this policy and some were done under pro rata basis also. "Whether the government took any exception to it? How could the Chief of Army Staff defy the government order," a bench of justices T S Thakur and R Banumathi asked.
"What exceptions you took," it further asked, adding how can the Army, on its own, fill up certain vacancies under pro rata basis.

Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, appearing for the Defence Ministry, said that the Centre had approved the new promotion policy, which has been quashed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, meant for officers of the rank of Colonel and above from January, 2009. "Where is the government order? Where is the acceptance of the government. Show us the letter or acceptance of the Prime Minister or 'Raksha Mantri'," the bench said, adding, "we want to satisfy ourselves. We will give you the fullest opportunity".

The ASG then referred to the records to buttress the point that the 'command exit' promotion policy has been approved. The court then adjourned the hearing in the matter. Earlier, the court had asked the Centre to file its response as to whether it had approved the Army's "command exit promotion" policy or not.

It had also asked the Defence Secretary or a person authorised by him to file an affidavit within a week stating "whether the government had accepted the recommendations of the AV Singh Committee with regard to the 'command exit promotion policy'". Some army officers had claimed that the new promotion policy had adversely affected them as it is "arbitrary" and highly skewed in favour of Infantry and Artillery, as compared to other branches of the Army. 

The bench is hearing the appeal of the Defence Ministry against AFT's decision to quash Army's "command exit promotion" policy on the ground that it is violative of Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution. The apex court had on March 25 stayed the March 2 decision of AFT to quash Army's promotion policy. Earlier, the court had asked the Defence Ministry to file its rejoinder to the response of the officers on whose plea AFT had passed the order.

Advocate Meenakshi Lekhi, appearing for several officers, had submitted that all ranks of personnel from Colonel and above would be affected due to the "biased" promotion policy. She was appearing for the main petitioners including Lt Col P K Choudhary on whose plea AFT had said that the 2009 promotion policy had resulted in preferential promotions to officers of select branches of Army and hence should be scrapped.

Some of the officers had said that personnel of all combative division except Infantry and Artillery have joined the fight against the 2009 promotion policy. In its appeal, the government has justified the promotion policy, saying the Army, being the employer, has a right to have its promotion policy and that AFT should not have interfered in the "policy decision".

It further said the age profile of unit commanders in Pakistan and Chinese armies was 35 and 40 years respectively and hence the age limit of battalion commanders in Indian Army also needed to be less. The central government had in 2001 asked the Chief of Army Staff to refer the recommendations of AV Singh Committee on restructuring of the officer cadre of the Army. The report was aimed at reducing the age of battalion commanders.