RAHUL JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner impugns the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the "AFT") dated 30th July, 2012 rejecting his application. The petitioner was commissioned in the Infantry, Unit No. 10, Garhwal Rifles, after completing the training in the National Defence Academy and Indian Military Academy. It is stated that at the time of recruitment, the Army was aware that the petitioner was a heavily built individual and a Boxer of national repute. He weighed 80 kg. against the ideal weight of 67 kg. Between 1993 and 2008, he served his Unit. It is also stated that the petitioner was given posting in the field area, including those of high altitude and counter insurgency areas such as Kargil; and was involved in Operation Vijay (Kargil), Operation Parakram (J & K) and Operation Rakshak (J & K and Punjab). The petitioner contends that he kept getting promotion according to his performance. Whilst so, pursuant to a medical evaluation done some time in December, 2008, his categorization was temporarily downgraded to P2 F(1)(A)(T24). This medical evaluation persisted till the end of May 2009 -the period with which this Court is concerned. On account of Confidential Reports filed by his Initiating Officer for this period for the, "command criteria", posting that he was serving, the evaluation by his Initiating Officer was not considered favourable. This was one of the considerations which weighed with the Army authorities while overlooking his candidature for promotion to the rank of Colonel.

(2.) THE petitioner places heavy reliance upon the policy of 6th March, 1991. The relevant extract of that policy reads as follows:

(3.) INITIATING officers will mention the details of such cases in para 11 (b) of the ACR form. This policy will not apply to war wounded or equivalent category of officers as the policy has been laid down for them separately.