AMAR NATH Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS.
LAWS(SC)-2016-3-82
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 01,2016

AMAR NATH Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the record. It is common ground that the petitioner was, at the relevant point of time, at Sl.No.45 in his group. It is also common ground that no one junior to the petitioner has been promoted to the next higher rank of Junior Warrant Officer. The petitioner, therefore, has no reason to complain against his failure to pick-up the next rank. Counsel for the petitioner, however, argued that in terms of averments made in para 'B' of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-Union of India, the timeframe for the promotion to the rank of Junior Warrant Officer within Group-I ranges between 12 to 34 years of service, which implies that there is considerable stagnation in the service, denying to those in the petitioner's group a fair opportunity to get promoted to the next higher rank.
(2.) On behalf of respondent-Union of India it was, per contra, argued by Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General, that the promotion policy applicable to the petitioner and similarly situate personnel serving in the Air Force has been modified and reformed over a period of time so as to leave no room for dissatisfaction or disenchantment among the personnel serving in several groups some of which may be fast moving. Mr. Kumar argued that the Government have taken into consideration all relevant circumstances while directing modifications/reforms in the policy governing promotion of the Air Force Personnel. The modified policy, according to Mr. Kumar, makes it fair and reasonable and provides equal opportunity to all those serving in different groups in the matter of promotion. We see no reason to brush aside that submission of the learned Solicitor General, especially when the petitioner was since retired from service and no one junior to him has stolen to march over him while he was still in service. All that we need say is that the Government would do well to undertake a further review to bring such reforms as may, otherwise, be considered reasonable to prevent any heart burning among persons serving in different trades and falling in different groups on account of some of those included in such groups getting promoted earlier than others purely on fortuitous circumstances. With these observations the special leave petition is dismissed. No costs.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.