COLLECTOR D D SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Colonel int he Army, has come up with this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of mandamus to the respondents in the nature of an order and/or direction requiring them to consider the petitioner for selection/promotion to the rank of Brigadier in the Selection Board meeting scheduled to be held on 28th February 1991 and to promote him as such, if found suitable, taking the petitioner to have been commissioned in December 1965.

(2.) The facts are not in dispute, and in short are that the petitioner was selected for Emergency Recruitment and joined training as an officer on Emergency Commission on 20th January 1964 and was granted Emergency Commission on 2nd August 1964, after completion of the period of training which actualy worked out to be six months 12 days. He was granted permanent commission on 1st April 1970 and has been in continuous service since then and after earning all the promotions as and when fell due, is at present, as already noted, holding the rank of a Colonel. It appears that the respondents are considering officers of a given batch for promotion to the next rank. In so far as the promotion for Bragadier that fell due in 1991 is concerned, the selection was confined to the officers of the batch of December 1965. It is this decision of the respondents which has given a cause for grievance to the petitioner, the contention being that he should be deemed to be an officer of the batch of December 1965, and not that of January 1966, as treated by the respondents.

(3.) Petitioner's contention is two-fold. Firstly, the period of training for officers of the permanent commission is about two years, and that it has never gone up to full 730 days. It is further contended that almost invariably a cadet, joining the training in January of a year has been commissioned in December of the next following year and a cadet joining training in July of a year has been granted permanent commission during June of the next following year. It is, therefore, alleged that the respondents have not justification to take the period of 730 days as the base for arriving at the ante date of seniority to be given for the Emergency Commissioned Officers. It is further contended that even otherwise, had the petitioner been recruited agaist a permanent commission, then having joined training in January 1964, in the normal course he would have been commissioned on permanent basis some time in December 1965 and that it will be discriminatory on the part of the respondents to now insist that the petitioner should be relegated to the seniority of January 1966 by working out the formula on the basis of taking two years as the prescribed period of training for permanent commissioned officers.