UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Vs. LT. COL. P.K. CHOUDHARY AND ORS.
LAWS(SC)-2016-2-36
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on February 15,2016

Union of India and Anr. Appellant
VERSUS
Lt. Col. P.K. Choudhary And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

T.S.THAKUR, J. - (1.) These appeals under Section 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 are directed against a judgment and order dated 2 nd March, 2015 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby Original Application No. 430/2012 filed by the Respondents has been allowed and policy circular dated 20 th January, 2009 issued by the Government of India quashed with a direction to the Appellant -Union of India to consider the Respondents for promotion to the rank of Colonel by creating supernumerary posts with effect from the date the said Respondents were eligible for such promotion. Facts giving rise to the proceedings before the Tribunal and the present appeals may be summarized as under:
(2.) The Respondents were commissioned into various Corps/streams of the Indian Army after they successfully passed out from the Indian Military Academy/Officers Training Academy. The initial allocation of the respondents to different Corps was based on parameters prescribed for that purpose depending inter alia upon the number of actual vacancies in Arms, Arms Support or Services, operational commitments and requirements arising from new raisings. Merit of the candidates, the need for an equal distribution of vacancies applying what is described as 'Black Method' and the individual choice expressed by the cadets were also some of the major factors that were taken into consideration while making allocations.
(3.) It is common ground that there was no challenge to the allocation of cadets to Arms, Arms Support or Services at any point of time. It is also not in dispute that four out of the five Respondents viz. Lt. Col. P.K. Choudhary, Lt. Col. G.S. Dhillon, Lt. Col. A.K. Pandey and Lt. Col. R.M.S. Pundir had opted for commission into Army Service Corps (AMC) and none of them had opted either for Combat Arms or Arms Support. Similarly, Lt. Col. Ajay Chawla -Respondent No.5 in this appeal had given Army Service Corps as one of the options of his choice. The respondents were accordingly allocated and have served in their respective Corps and Raisings as Lt. Colonels, which rank they held at the time of filing Original Application No.430 of 2012 in the Tribunal and continue to do so at present.;


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