- (1.) The appellant is a Lieutenant colonel in the Indian Army. He went before the Allahabad High court by filing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution and maintained that the respondents did not give effect to the judgment of this court dated 10th of August, 1983 in Writ Petition No. 5302 of 1982 wherein this court had directed:- "We find no substance in any one of the three reasons mentioned by Shri abdul Khader on behalf of the respondents for the reversion of the petitioner from the rank of Acting lieutenant Colonel to Major. The reversion or reduction in rank cannot be justified and it is accordingly quashed. The petitioner 257 is directed to be restored to the rank of Acting Lieutenant Colonel with effect- from the date he was reverted and stripped of the badges indicating his rank. As a result of the restoration of the rank of the acting Lieutenant Colonel to the petitioner, other consequences, such as, consideration of the petitioner's further claims to advancement, pay, arrears of pay etc. will have to be considered by the authorities and it is directed that these claims may be considered and disposed of within a period of six months from today. The petitioner will submit all his claims to the appropriate authorities within a period of one month from today. . . . . "and claimed confirmation in the rank and further reliefs.
(2.) Subsequent to the decision of this court the appellant has again been medically categories as Shape-II and this categorisation has been seriously challenged both before the high court and here. According to the appellant, he was subjected to examination recently and the Army psychiatrist, on the basis of the past reports and without any independent assessment, has classified him as permanent Shape-II which takes away his chances of confirmation as a full colonel and of further promotion.
(3.) In course of hearing of the appeal, we suggested to learned additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondents to have a fresh psychiatric evaluation of the appellant by a competent body of psychiatrists by including in the board some in-service and retired Army psychiatrists and some from outside. This was initially opposed by learned additional Solicitor General by contending that it would be against the discipline of the Defence department and would create an unwholesome precedent. We adjourned the matter and gave him the opportunity to take instructions from government and we are happy to note that on the basis of instructions, he has agreed, as a special case, to the constitution of such a board of psychiatrists. Appellant has also been heard in person in the matter. He has made written submissions by way of an application which we have taken into consideration.;