The Armed Forces Tribunal Regional Bench Lucknow while dealing with matter filed by Ex Sigmn Om Prakash Surwade, has held that members of Armed Forces have special character and respectful identity amongst the members of civil society and therefore they are required to maintain the high decorum of military personality throughout the life, the Hon’ble Tribunal has denied any relief as prayed by the applicant and ignored the 12 years of long service rendered to the army as well as to the nation.
The counsel for the applicant heavily relied upon:
(a) Veerendra Kumar Dubey v. Chief of Army Staff and Vijay Shanker Mishra vs. Union of India & Ors – In both the cases, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that award of four red ink entries simply pushes the individual concerned into a grey area where he can be considered for discharge but just because he qualified for such discharge, does not mean that he must necessarily suffer that fate. The Commanding Officer while discharging an individual to consider the nature of offence for which red ink entries have been awarded, other aspects that an individual has put in long years of service, hard stations and difficult living conditions during his service. On these basis, as due procedure was not followed, the appeal was allowed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in favour of the appellants.
(b) S Muthu Kumaran vs. Union of India – In this case applicant has completed more than 15 years of pensionable service and was dismissed from service being involved in an enrollment scam. Keeping in view his gravity of offence, 15 years pensionable service and to give an opportunity to lead honourable life in the society after retirement, the Hon’ble Apex Court has allowed the petition by modifying the order of dismissal passed by the Tribunal into discharge from service.
(c) Narain Singh vs. Union of India & Ors- In this case, applicant was discharged from service after completion of 13 years & 7 months of service solely on the basis of four red ink entries which were awarded within a short span of one year. The Hon’ble Apex Court found order of discharge wholly unjustified and not sustainable in law while discharging the appellant from service. The Commanding Officer has failed to take into consideration all relevant aspects/factors and order of discharge was passed mechanically on mere four red ink entries. Hence, appeal was allowed in favour of the appellant.
(d) Smt. Malti Devi vs. Union of India & Ors – In this case, husband of the applicant had served for more than 18 years of service and order of dismissal was modified by the Tribunal to discharge from service in order to enable her to grant her family pension as her husband completed more than 15 years of pensionable service.
(e) Gdsm Brahmanand Chauhan vs. Union of India & Ors In this case, applicant was discharged from service on account of four red ink entries and was reinstated in service as due procedure was not followed by the respondents.
(f) Ex Sgt. Gupteshwar Singh vs. Union of India & Ors – In this case, applicant had served for more than 20 years of pensionable service and order of dismissal was modified to discharge from service being applicant was not found involved in misconduct for which punishment was awarded by the respondents.
(g) Ex Sep Prem Singh vs. Union of India & Ors – In this case, applicant was discharged from service on account of six red ink entries and was reinstated in service as due procedure was not followed by the respondents keeping in view the gravity of offences committed by the applicant.
(h) Nk Abhilash Singh Kushwah vs. Union of India & Ors – In this case, applicant has completed approx 15 years pensionable service and was discharged from service on account of Alcohol Dependency Syndrome and red ink entries. His order of discharge mainly based on offence of Alcohol Dependency Syndrome was quashed by the Tribunal but prayer to set aside red ink entries was rejected. Hence, O.A. was allowed in part.
In concluding paragraph of judgment the Hon’ble Tribunal has opined that hat applicant was negligent towards his duties, habitual of over consumption of alcohol during his duty hours and indisciplined soldier. During the service tenure the applicant was awarded eight punishments for his irresponsible attitude and indiscipline nature towards his duty. Even after giving repeated warnings/counselling, the applicant did not show any improvement in his personal/military discipline and conduct. There being no other option, being an undesirable solider, the applicant was discharged from service after due procedure as per Army Rule 13 (3) III (v) and Army Headquarters policy letter dated 28.12.1988 on the subject. Hence, the applicant is not entitled the relief prayed in Original Application.
Read Judgment: OA 194 of 2020 Ex Sigmn Om Prakash Surwade