COL. RAJEEV NEG Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to correct his seniority vis-a-vis respondents No. 5 and 6 in view of Para- 2 to OM No. 21(4)/92/D (inspection) dtd. 22/12/1993 and Para- 22 of letter No. 04477/MS Policy dtd. 21/12/2004 issued by MS Branch. In addition, a direction is also sought to respondents to consider and promote petitioner w.e.f. 1/5/2012 to the rank of Brigadier being the senior most officer of the rank of Colonel in Electronic Discipline, with all consequential benefits. Further, a direction to re-fix inter-se seniority of all officers permanently seconded in DGQA after 2004, especially of those 16 officers mentioned in letter dtd. 27/4/2011 is also sought.

(2.) Petitioner claims to have joined Indian Army in the year 1988, though he was assigned two years anti-dated seniority of 1986 Batch in the rank of Second Lieutenant at the time of his joining. Petitioner further claims to have cleared Part 'D' Exam in 1999 and became Substantive Major and his seniority for promotion was fixed with 1988 Batch Officers. He was considered for promotion from Major to Lieutenant Colonel in the year 2004 but was not empanelled for promotion as his seniority for the purpose of promotion was brought down to 1989. He was Permanently Seconded to the organisation DGQA in the rank of Substantive Major in October, 2004. He was promoted to the rank of Colonel (Selection Grade) in May, 2007 as a 1989 Batch Officer.

(3.) Since petitioner's seniority was brought down from 1988 to 1989, being aggrieved he submitted a representation vide letter No. MSQA/RN.47965 dtd. 31/12/2008 to the Additional Director (O), which was turned down by the respondents vide letter dtd. 20/2/2009. Petitioner filed a Statutory Complaint on 20/4/2009 which according to him was not decided within the stipulated time of 180 days and the same was rejected by the competent authorities after almost three years. Petitioner further claims to have undergone personal hearings with DG, DGQA against his rejection of Statutory Complaint but to no avail.