AFT upholds dismissal of IAF officer for accepting cash, leaking documents of AN-32 overhaul project to foreign vendor
Vijay Mohan
Chandigarh, April 24
The Armed Forces Tribunal has upheld the dismissal of an Air Force officer for allegedly accepting illegal gratification from a civilian contractor and unauthorisedly handing him certain documents pertaining to the overhaul of AN-32 transport aircraft in Ukraine.
A court of inquiry (COI) convened by Air Officer Commanding Air Force Station, New Delhi, in 2016 had blamed the officer, an aeronautical engineer of the rank of Wing Commander, of developing close relations with the Indian representative of a foreign firm and meeting him several times.
During this course, according to the findings of the COI, the officer handed over 45 service documents to the representative and received about Rs 1.25 lakh from him.
The COI also blamed him for improperly directing an airman to hand over an envelope containing two documents, including a letter from the Air Attache, Ukraine, written to Air Headquarters containing details of a meeting between the IAF officers and the overhauling firm, and the status report of the AN-32 overhaul project.
The aforesaid actions of the officer violated Air Headquarters’ directives regarding ethics and code of conduct while dealing with vendors.
The COI had been ordered to investigate the circumstances under which the airman was found to be handing over the envelope containing the aforementioned documents to another representative of the firm at the reception of Air Headquarters, New Delhi, in June 2016.
The officer had averred that the COI was illegal and he was implicated in a fake case, forced to make a confessional statement and not given adequate opportunity to defend himself. He had sought the COI and subsequent show cause notice to be quashed and he be reinstated in service or he be allowed premature separation from service with full service benefits.
On perusal of records and contentions of the counsels, Tribunal’s Bench comprising Justice Rajendra Menon and Lt Gen PM Hariz observed that it is clear from the evidence of the officer that he had initially admitted of having received cash from the representative, who had also accepted meeting the officer.
“The petitioner had contravened the laid down procedures while dealing with the representative of foreign firms as provided in directives. By such dealings with vendors, he had exhibited total breach of trust and absolute lack of integrity,” the Bench held.
Stating that his actions amounted to conduct unbecoming that of an officer, the Bench ruled, “The evidence on record substantially supports the prosecution case that the petitioner is guilty of having committed the offence charged against him.”
The Bench also did not see any errors in the conduct of the COI and subsequent procedures, including the administrative action of dismissal, taken against the officer after following due process of law as required.
