RAHUL RANJAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(DLH)-2007-8-234
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on August 17,2007

RAHUL RANJAN Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.N.AGGARWAL, J. - (1.) THE petitioner was enrolled in the service of Indian Air Force as an Aircrafts man in its non -technical stream and he along with other selected candidates was deployed for 24 weeks mandatory Joint Basic Phase Training Course (JBPTC) 1/2004 at Airman Training School, Belgaum. The training commenced from 19.01.2004 Due to his poor performance in the examination held during training, the petitioner was awarded Cease Training and discharge from the service of Air Force w.e.f 06.07.2004 under Clause 15 (2) (j) of the Air Force Rules, 1969 under the clause 'Unlikely To Make An Efficient Airman'. The petitioner in this writ petition has called in question an order of his discharge and has prayed for a writ of mandamus against the respondents directing them to produce his original answer -sheet of English paper of final examination and the entire training record and also to direct his reinstatement in the service of Air Force with all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner raised by him in this writ petition is that his answer -sheet in English paper of final test was not correctly evaluated by the respondents as he got to know on rechecking of his answer -sheet of English paper that four answers, which according to him were correct, were not evaluated and that two marks were not added in total due to which he was wrongly shown to have failed in English paper in final test. In response to notice of this writ petition the respondents have filed their counter affidavit and have specifically denied the assertion made by the petitioner in his writ petition regarding evaluation of his answer script of English paper in final test. It is contended that the petitioner was shown his answer -sheet at the time of Station Review Board and the petitioner after seeing his said answer -sheet made an endorsement thereon 'seen and satisfied'. It is further contended that the allegation of the petitioner that four answers were not evaluated and that two marks not added and that cross mark was put against the correct answer and further that aggregate of evaluated questions was 39 marks instead of 37 marks are completely baseless and without any foundation whatsoever. The respondents have referred to and relied upon the scheme of Joint Basic Phase of training and the mandatory requirement for the new recruits to appear and pass the periodical test as per schedule circulated to them at the time of joining the training. The stand of the respondents is that the petitioner was rightly discharged from the Air Force service during training as he failed to secure the required standards/marks in the term test as well as in the final test. This fact according to the respondents has been concealed by the petitioner in his writ petition.
(3.) WE have heard learned Counsels for the parties and have also perused the original record including the answer script of the petitioner of English paper in final test which according to him was wrongly evaluated by the respondents. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was a fresh recruit recruited as an Aircrafts man in the Air Force and that he was discharged from service due to his poor performance in the examination during training. Joint Basic Phase of training, which the petitioner has undergone before his discharge, was planned to inculcate Militarism, Jointmanship and to prepare the new recruits for trade training. This training was aimed to instill discipline, foster camaraderie and Esprit de corps. The curriculum for the trainees was comprised of General Service Training (GST), English, Hindi, General Service Knowledge (GSK) and Basic Computer Training. General Service Training consisted of Drill Training, Endurance Training, PT and Games, Field Craft Training, Small Arms Training and other related topics. In General Service Knowledge (GSK), the trainees were to be taught the following steps: (a) Service Ethos (b) History of IAF (c) Military History (d) AF Law (e) AF Regulations (f) General aspects of Health and Hygiene (g) Airmen like Qualities. ;


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