Defence Ministry ‘can’t review’ Army inquiry decisions

Vijay Mohan

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, March 1

There is no “specific” power vested in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to review or revise findings of a court of inquiry duly constituted by the Army and subsequent action undertaken by the competent authority thereof, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has ruled.

Directing the MoD and the Army to promote a Brigadier to the rank of Major General, against whom the MoD had ordered fresh action for alleged irregularities in procurements after he was approved for promotion, the AFT held while a general power in relation to discipline is available to the ministry under rules, this does not mean that the MoD is empowered under this provision to deal with the case at hand in a way they have dealt with it.

Based upon complaints, a court of inquiry convened by the General Officer Commanding, 14 Corps had held three brigadiers blameworthy for irregularities and procedural lapses during procuring equipment for Border Roads Project Himank in Ladakh. The inquiry did not find any financial loss to the exchequer and the three officers were awarded a severe displeasure (non-recordable) by way of administrative action in December 2015.

In 2014, the officer had been approved for promotion as Major General in the “staff only” stream after necessary Vigilance clearance by the MoD. In September 2015, an officer whose name figured below that of the petitioner in the merit list was promoted and the aforementioned court of inquiry ordered the same month.

The MoD did not take any decision regarding the promotion of the petitioner and in May 2016 directed the Army HQs to review the quantum of punishment. When the Army HQs replied that such a move was inappropriate, the MoD, in December 2016, ordered the Army to hold a fresh court of inquiry. This was again negated by the Army on grounds of being legally incorrect.

In January 2017, the MoD, observing that the punishment was not commensurate with the seriousness of the charges, directed the Army HQs to initiate disciplinary action (court martial) against the petitioner, on which certain issues were raised by the Army HQs and the move remained in abeyance.

“The MoD does not have a case that the inquiry conducted was not proper or wrong. It is nobody’s case that the findings entered in the inquiry were baseless or wrong,” the AFT ruled. In such circumstances where is the authority for the MoD to interfere with the punishment imposed by the competent authority, the FAT questioned while observing that action was sought by the MoD only against the petitioner and not the other two similarly placed brigadiers.