- (1.) A retired Air Force Officer after a distinguished service in the Indian Air Force is before this court with his second writ petition inter alia seeking a declaration, to declare that the policy letter No. 7 (1) 79 (D) AIR III Volume II, dated 30-8-1986 has no statutory force and the same is arbitrary and unreasonable or in the alternative to hold that the said policy is not applicable to the training and maintenance command. Secondly, for a writ to quash the impugned communication dated 29-12-1995 issued by respondent. Consequently, to direct the respondents to grant notional status of AIR Officer Commanding in Chief (AOC-in-C) w. e. f. 31-5-1995.
(2.) ON an earlier occasion, petitioner was before this Court in W. P. No. 24396 of 1995 inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint him to the post of AOC-in-C in Bangalore or in the alternative to accord him the status of AOC-in-C from 31-5-1995 notionally. The claim of the petitioner had been resisted by respondents solely depending upon the policy laid down in the letter dated 30-8-1986 issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Defence and communicated to the Chief of the AIR staff setting out the procedure to be followed in regard to the appointment of Vice-Chief of the AIR staff or AIR officer Commanding-in-Chief of an AIR command. Petitioner's assertion before this Court was that the policy guidelines issued by the Ministry of defence would be applicable only to vice-Chief of AIR staffer AIR officer Commanding-in-Chief of an operational command and not in respect of training command or maintenance command but the stand of the respondents even then was that the policy indicated in the letter dated 30-8-1986 is applicable both to operational commands and other commands. The Court while disposing off the petition by its order dated 14-11-1995 was pleased to observe as under: "but, perusal of the orders of appointment of the petitioner posting would indicate that the respondents have maintained a distinction between different kinds of commands and they are indicated whenever needed and the letter dated 30-8-1986 sent to the Chief of AIR staff does not make it clear that it is applicable to commands other than operational command. Therefore, it becomes necessary to direct the respondents to examine the case of the petitioner as to whether he is entitled to the relief sought for in the petition namely to appoint him to the post of AOC-in-C training command at Bangalore or to accord such status from 31-5-1995. Respondents are directed to consider this aspect of the matter within a period of four weeks from today" .
(3.) PURSUANT to the directions issued by this Court, respondents have framed the impugned order dated 29-12-1995 rejecting the claim of the petitioner solely on the ground that petitioner is not eligible for promotion to the rank of AOC-in-C in any of the commands of the Indian Air Force, since he had less than 1 year of residual service. The thinking and reasoning of the respondents is reflected in their order and that order is extracted and the same is as under: "tele: 3010231/7334 air Headquarters vayu Bhavan new Delhi-11. Air HQ/21901/5682/po2 (A)29th December, 1995 air Mshl A. S. Sethi commandant national Defence Academy khadakwasla pune - 411 023. Court Case: Air Mshl A. S. Sethi (5682) F (P)1. Reference is invited to the orders dated 14-11-1995 of the High Court of Karnataka in the Writ petition No. 24396 of 1995 - Air Mshl A. S. Sethi v Union of India and Others. 2. It is intimated that in accordance with the directions of the Court, the case of Air Mshl A. S. Sethi (5682) F (P), Commandant, National Defence Academy was examined again by the government. The relevant records relating to the issue of Government policy letter No. 7 (1)/79/d (Air-III) Vol. II, dated 30-8-1986 were also examined. After considering all the relevant facts on record, the Government has come to the conclusion that the condition of having a minimum of one year of residual service left before attaining the age of retirement from the date of appointment as AOC-in-C is applicable even for HQRS Maintenance and Training commands and the Air Officer, Air Mshl A. S. Sethi (5682) F (P), is not eligible for promotion to the rank of AOC-in-C in any of the Commands of the IAF as he has less than 1 year of residual service. Sd/ (S. N. Rathour)Air Mshl. Air Officer i/c Personnel".;