WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO(s). 26 OF 2012
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO(s). 26 OF 2012
VIJAY KUMAR SINGH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Interlocutory Application for impleadment is rejected.
2. General Vijay Kumar Singh, Chief of the Army – the petitioner - has approached this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated December 30, 2011, Office Memorandum dated July 21, 2011 and order dated July 22, 2011. By these orders/office memorandum, the petitioner's date of birth in the service record has been recognised as May 10, 1950. The petitioner maintains that his date of birth is, in fact, May 10, 1951 and must be treated as such for all purposes in the service record.
3. A caveat has been filed on behalf of the respondent- Union of India. The matter initially came up before us on February 3, 2012. In the course of hearing on that date, certain issues cropped up particularly in relation to the decision making process leading to the order dated December 30, 2011. At the request of the learned Attorney General, the matter was adjourned for today.
4. As soon as the hearing commenced today, Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General, handed over to us a short affidavit of K.L. Nandwani, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Defence, on behalf of the respondent. The affidavit is taken on record. It is stated in the affidavit that the order dated December 30, 2011 may be treated as confined to the order holding that statutory complaint filed by the petitioner was not maintainable. The second part of the order dated December 30, 2011 which deals with the merits on the diverse contentions raised in the complaint has been sought to be withdrawn.
5. We grant permission to the respondent to withdraw the order dated December 30, 2011 to the extent noted above. In view thereof, the petitioner's grievance with regard to the part of the order dated December 30, 2011 which deals with the merits of the controversy does not survive.
6. The principal controversy, accordingly, now remains to the challenge to the Office Memorandum dated July 21, 2011 and the order dated July 22, 2011. By the Office Memorandum dated July 21, 2011, the respondent has annulled the order issued by the ADGMP dated February 25, 2011 and has reiterated that the petitioner's official date of birth will continue to be maintained as May 10, 1950.
7. By order dated July 22, 2011 that followed Office Memorandum dated July 21, 2011, while maintaining that the petitioner's date of birth in the service record continues to be maintained as May 10, 1950, it has been held that there is no reason for it to consider effecting any change in the date of birth of the petitioner as recorded.
8. We have heard Mr. U.U. Lalit, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General, and Mr. Rohinton F. Nariman, learned Solicitor General, for the respondent-Union of India, at quite some length.
9. In the course of hearing, Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General, stated that the respondent-Union of India had not questioned the integrity or bonafide of the petitioner. He also stated that the contest by the respondent-Union of India to the Writ Petition was on a matter of principle and it did not reflect any lack of faith or confidence in the petitioner's ability to lead the Army.
10. As a matter of fact, the question before us in the Writ Petition is not about the determination of actual date of birth of the petitioner, but it concerns the recognition of a particular date of birth of the petitioner by the respondent in the official service record.
11. In view of the statement made by Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General, and the limited controversy in the Writ Petition as indicated above, learned senior counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press the matter further and he seeks withdrawal of the Writ Petition.
12. Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn.
.......................J.
(R.M. LODHA)
NEW DELHI; .......................J.
FEBRUARY 10, 2012. (H.L. GOKHALE)
___________________________________________________________________________________
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Varghese K George <vkg.george@gmail.com> wrote:
what nonsense! it is as if only General Singh and you are honest! every other general in the army, the cabinet, and of course the supreme court judges who asked him to take a walk, are all corrupt!! OMG!!! such arrogance and self righteousness of a handful are the real danger to democracy in this country....
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Devasahayam MG <mgd@airtelmail.in> wrote:The MoD mess–The Reality
Ex-Major M.G.Devasahayam, 1AS (Retd)
Theopen feud between the Ministry of Defence and the Chief of the Army Staff aroseout of the contrived Date of Birth controversy. A corrupt cabal had conspiredsince 2006 to truncate Gen. VK Singh's tenure by digging out UPSC applicationform and trashing his School Certificate.
Yet, neither the DoB issue is over yet, as is beingwrongly believed, nor is the tenure of General VK Singh going to end in thenext two months as is being widely claimed. The fact is that Supreme Court hasput the ball back in the court of MoD by ruling: "As a matter of fact, thequestion before us in the Writ Petition is not about the determination ofactual date of birth of the petitioner, butit concerns the recognition of a particular date of birth of the petitioner bythe respondent (Government of India) in the official service record."
It is therefore imperative that the MoDhas to first pass a legally speaking order 'recognising' Gen.VK Singh's realDoB as per law and Rules that hold School Certificate as paramount. This hasnot been done and the retirement orders of Gen VK Singh have not been served onhim till now. Yet MoD has nominated and named his successor (for whose benefit the entire conspiracy and manipulation took place) to take over asCOAS on 31 May 2012.
This action is untenable and the real cause of the messthat MoD has got into and only they are to be blamed. Instead they are tryingto pass it on to Gen. VK Singh by insinuating that he is now a 'frustrated man'and is trying to rake up the Tatra bribery issue and leaking out his letter on'defence preparedness' to PM to seek revenge. Some MPs, including congenitally corruptones, have asked for Gen VK Singh's summary dismissal and arrest without evenholding an enquiry!
This way of portraying theserving chief of the Indian Army as an adversary just because he is fightingagainst corruption and injustice is wrought with serious danger andconsequences. It is our Armed Forces who have defended and protected ourdemocracy through their valour, sacrifice and total sense of patriotism, bereftof any political ambitions as in our neighbouring countries. It is largelybecause of them that India stands tall as a free and sovereign Republic. Among the armed forces, the Army is the largest andthe most visible face. The chief of that force has a special status in thenation's affairs and he cannot be distinguished from the Institution he heads. When aninstitution like the Army is impaled, it is the people who bleed.
Thepolitico-bureaucratic power coterie that is trying to bulldoze the Army Chiefis very distressing. If the serving Army Chief is treated this way and thesecorrupt cabals have their final say at least for two generations, no militarycommander will raise his head. And the message for military commanders will bethat it isn't merit, honesty or integrity that will get them promotions andtenures but pandering to the corrupt politico-bureaucratic cabal. The lastbastion of professional meritocracy in India will be crumbled and the damagewill be lasting.
This is an open war between the honest and the corrupt and cannot becountenanced in the interest of national security and integrity in governanceIit time people with conscience stood up and be counted..
--
Varghese K George
Chief of Bureau (Political)
Hindustan Times
18-20, Kasturba Gandhi Marg
New Delhi - 110 001
Mobile: 91-98100-91710
