COL HARISH CHANDRA GOSWAMY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that falls for determination in this petition is whether the petitioner's consideration for promotion to the rank of Brigadier was proper and valid in accordance with law. The challenge to the petitioner's non-selection for promotion is based entirely on the plea that the Selection board concerned had, contrary to the directions issued by this court and upheld by the Supreme Court in an earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner, considered the petitioner to be unfit for promotion, not because he was less meritorious than his batch mates of the 1963 batch of officers but because the board was influenced by the petitioner's trial and punishment which fact the board could not have 0taken into consideration as the court martial proceedings as also the punishment imposed upon the petitioner had been quashed and the petitioner held entitled to all the benefits as if he had not been tried or punished. Before we advert to the merits of the contentions on either side, we may briefly summarise the facts as under:

(2.) THE petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Army in the year 1963. In due course of time, he was promoted as a full Colonel. He was then posted as commanding Officer in 316 Station Workshop (Maintenance) between 10th December, 1982 and 23rd February, 1986. Based on certain complaints that were sent to the chief of the Army Staff alleging irregularities in the local purchase of material for repair of vehicles, a charge sheet was framed against him accusing him of misconduct on as many as eight counts. A general court martial was then convened and the petitioner found guilty in regard to four of the charges framed against him while the remaining four were held not proved. He was sentenced to be cashiered and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years which sentence was confirmed even by the authority competent to do so.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by his trial and punishment, the petitioner filed Criminal writ Petition No. 675/1989 in this court. That petition was heard and allowed by V. B. Bansal, J, as his lordship then was, holding that the court martial proceedings and the subsequent orders of punishment were wholly illegal and without the authority of law. The petitioner was consequently held entitled to all the benefits as if he had not been tried and punished. The operative portion of the order passed by this court was as under: