COMDT. AKS PANWAR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is presently working as Commandant at the Coast Guard Air Station, Chennai, has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned proceedings viz., (i) the order passed by the third respondent/the Commander, Coast Guard Headquarters Region (East), Chennai, in Ref. OF/0110 -X, dated 15.10.2012, (ii) the order of the first respondent/the Defence Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi, made in SRO 133, dated 17.09.2004 and SRO 86, dated 12.07.2002, (iii) a letter No. NA/1109/2005, dated 29.08.2005, of the Ministry of Defence, and consequently to direct the respondents to extend the benefits of previous military service to the petitioner and thereby to promote him in accordance with the Coast Guard Recruitment Rules (CGRR) and to consider him for promotion to the post of Deputy Inspector General, Inspector General and Director General as per the seniority with retrospective effect from dates on which his juniors were promoted and consequently to pay all the service and monetary benefits.

(2.) MR . S. Silambanan, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner joined the Coast Guard as a Direct Entry Officer in the Civil post of Assistant Commandant on 06.01.1985, after 2 years and 23 days of Military service in Indian Air Force. After joining the Coast Guard, he was given basic training and during that period, he submitted an application for counting of his Military service towards civil pension. Accepting the said request, the Deputy Director Pers (OA & amp; R), in his proceedings dated 26.07.2001, approved the said claim of the petitioner for counting the period rendered between 11.12.1981 and 03.01.1984 in Indian Air Force towards pension. Therefore, learned Senior Counsel pleaded, having allowed the service rendered by the petitioner in the Indian Air Force in the above said period, the second respondent wrongly refused to extend the benefit of previous military service towards promotion as provided in the Coast Guard Recruitment Rules (CGRR) promulgated vide SRO 236, dated 17.09.1982 as amended by SRO 133, dated 14.01.1984 and SRO 69, dated 07.03.1991. The further grievance of the petitioner is that since the CGRR were not published in any of the Coast Guard manuals/books and Policy Letters, there was no means of knowing the benefits available to the direct entry Coast Guard officers about the inclusion of their previous military service. Therefore, he submitted an application under RTI Act and subsequent to his application, the petitioner had received all the manuals pertaining to CGRR, after protracted correspondence/representations for almost three years.

(3.) ADDING further, learned Senior counsel stated that the first respondent, vide gazette notifications SRO 86, dated 03.04.2002 and SRO 133, dated 17.09.2004, altered the promotion policy by applying the military provisions of Performance Appraisal Review Board (PARB) and military merit system of promotion in lieu of the bench mark system and by doing so, the first respondent denied the further promotion of the petitioner. It is further contended that though the petitioner brought the above said issue to the first respondent, the first respondent has neither replied nor corrected the injustice even after submitting number of applications under the RTI Act. On the contrary, the second respondent issued a show cause notice and a letter of caution through the third respondent to the petitioner for submitting the representation to the first respondent.