Approved promotion cannot be held back during pendency of subsequent inquiry: AFT
Vijay Mohan
Chandigarh, October 18
The Armed Forces Tribunal has held that the elevation of an officer who has already been approved for promotion to the next rank cannot he held back during the pendency of disciplinary proceedings initiated against him subsequently.
A Lieutenant Colonel was empanelled for promotion by No.3 Selection Board held in February 2021 and his posting order as Commandant of an Assam Rifles battalion, tenable in the rank of Colonel, was issued by Army Headquarters in August 2021.
He underwent the required orientation and interview with Assam Rifles and was required to undergo medical examination prior to assuming command. The officer could not undergo the medical test due to quarantine and other official duties.
His promotion-cum-assumption order was issued by Army Headquarters in September 2021 for taking over command of the battalion.
His medical board, however, could not take place as scheduled due to non-availability of some documents, which were received a few days later. The medical board proceedings were finally completed in October 2021.
In the meantime, a case was taken up through the Directorate General Assam Rifles to cancel or hold in abeyance the promotion order of September 2021 and the same was cancelled by Army Headquarters in October 2021 due to want of medical documents.
In December 2021, the Inspector General Assam Rifles (IGAR) ordered a court of inquiry (COI) to investigate certain allegations against the officer pertaining to financial misappropriation. The COI began its proceedings in January 2022 and the officer was sidestepped as an additional officer.
“However, it is the contention of the respondents that the medical board proceedings were received on December 1, 2021 and the formal COI was ordered by IGAR on December 15, 2021, which makes it clear that the promotion could have been promulgated on ay day from December 1 to December 15, but the same was not done on the pretext of allegations against the officer,” the Tribunal comprising Justice Rajendra Menon and Lt Gen CP Mohanty observed.
“As a practice currently being followed, the Army withholds promotion already earned by an officer on the ground of pendency of a disciplinary inquiry even when no charge sheet is filed, which is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court,” the officer’s counsel, Col Indra Sen Singh (retd), said.
“We are of the considered opinion that when even the pendency of COI cannot be held as a ground to deny promotion, the contention of the respondents that allegations were levelled against him, is wholly unreasonable, unjustified and violative of Article 16 of the Constitution,” the Bench said in its order of October 16, 2023.
Stating that the officer cannot be denied his well-deserved right to promotion, the Bench directed that the Army issue an order notifying his promotion to the rank of Colonel, with his original seniority restored, within two weeks and restore all consequential benefits.
