Re: [HumJanenge] Incorrect records = lame-duck Army Chief

Indians are  book worms and book keepers never had an army or a nation till the colonial masters decided to quit  and hand over to those they cultivated to run their Empire with their language ! We never went into action ever to either over throw any foreign yolk or create empires and rule thus missing the vital intangible which equip a people to govern.  This sums up the nature of instincts that control our actions and thoughts.

With this preamble the question of Chiefs age controversy should never have been debated as a law problem in public ! Whatever the errors and contradictions at this level there aught to be no controversy before the common man . That it is reflects a deep malaise in our functioning , while the timing of  this revelation smacks of intrigue and deliberate  mischief . I am aware that neither the MOD nor the MS Branch are always clean having caught both at times for fudging and coverups. Debating this in media and making an issue of it is not only unproductive but nationally detrimental being the best way to ridicule the head of ones military institution  in eyes of the rest of the world  not to say in eyes of own soldier undermining his trust in the system which fields his commanders . This would  never   happen  in a  sound nation state . The error lies in house keeping of the government . Raking it up at this stage slams the government , the RM and the Def Secretary . Since the two dates cannot be reconciled now the benefit must go to the incumbent without recourse to legal interpretations This is a matter demanding bold decision and  loyalty of the State in standing by its military head for error lying shut in books for want of scrutiny by it in  time for which the Ministry of Defence is fully accountable .The COAS  must get the benefit  in interest of the institution and higher interests of the nation. His  going to court  will be to say the least most damaging to the country for let us not view this at all with legal blinkers but unwritten tenets of militray honour which is already fading  washout with two  ex Chiefs entangled in disreputable conduct not to speak of many more general officers  in the dock for blemished character. 

A RESOLUTION PASSED ON ABOVE LINES BY ALL THE SAINIKSANGH CELLS INCLUDING VILLAGE SAMITEES FROM GARHWAL AND UP WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE RM   

chauhan   

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Col NR Kurup" <colnrkurup@gmail.com>

To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 5:45 PM

Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Incorrect records = lame-duck Army Chief

> If the COAS goes to Court, he will have it. One can't be selective in
> this case. He can't claim to reckon his DoB as 1950 when 1950 suited
> him and  1951  when 1951 suited him. If someone dig into the case he
> has to answer for the benefits he availed by counting his DoB as 1950
> and 1951.If he is wise, I think he is will not press the case as he
> hardly get any gain other than one more year's service. He should
> honourably vacate the post in 2012 to enable his junior to become
> CoAS. in 2012
>
> On 22/07/2011, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/army-chiefs-age-controversy-battle-not-over-warn-experts-121262
>>
>> The government's decision on the date of birth of the man who heads the
>> Indian Army may not provide the closure many have been hoping for. Experts
>> say a complicated and lengthy legal battle could follow in the next few
>> months.
>>
>> Yesterday, the Defence Minister said that the government had accepted 1950
>> as the year in which General VK Singh was born. The Army Chief has been
>> arguing that he was born a year later. The problem is that Army records
>> reflect both.
>>
>> The biggest implication is the year in which the Army Chief will retire -
>> 2012, according to the government's decision. If it had accepted Mr Singh's
>> date of birth, his tenure would have extended to 2013.
>>
>> Several legal experts, including three retired Chief Justices, have said
>> that Mr Singh has a strong case against the government, should he decide to
>> go to court.
>>
>> The Defence Ministry has asked the official record-keeper of the Army - the
>> Adjutant General's branch - to change Mr Singh's date of birth in its
>> records from May 10, 1950 to May 10, 1951. But defence regulations state
>> that service records cannot be altered - a fact that the Adjutant General is
>> likely to stress today to the government.
>>
>> This is the first time that the age of a military chief has become a matter
>> of national concern and debate. Former Army chiefs state that the
>> government's decision could inadvertently turn General Singh into a
>> lame-duck Army Chief.
>>
>>
>> Read more at:
>> http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/army-chiefs-age-controversy-battle-not-over-warn-experts-121262&cp
>>