SURENDRA KUMAR SAHNI Vs. CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who working as Director General of Supply and Transport of the A service Corps, has approached this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing and setaside oceedings and recommendations of the of Inquiry in terms of order dated 26th May, 2005 and order directing attachment petitioner dated 18th July, 2006.

(2.) In the submissions of petitioner, the entire Court of Inquiry allegedly conducted be respondents is void and non est. A General Court of Inquiry was ordered on the basis of anonymous and Pseudonymous complaints, which itself was not permissible under Army Order 4/2000 read with Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003. Though the Inquiry was not directed against the petitioner but it was intended to falsely implicate and humiliate the petitioner at the end of his career as he was to retire on 30th September, 2006. These orders were also challenged on the ground of bias and mala fides. The petitioner has challenged the order of attachment on the ground that upon attachment, he has to serve under an officer, who is 3 year's junior to him i.e. HQ 2 Corps under the Command of Lt. General V.K. Singh, GOC despite the fact that there are other senior officers in the army commanders, who by virtue of their appointment could be said to be senior to the petitioner and thus, the respondents cannot take aid of doctrine of necessity in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The petitioner has specifically denied his involvement in any kind of irregularities and on the contrary has stated that he was responsible for issuance of certain instructions in relation to food inspection organization and detailing the measures for ensuring good supplies to the troops.