Headlines
Army's response in Kargil was 'sluggish', government tells SC
New Delhi, March 25
The government on
Wednesday told the Supreme Court that Indian army's response during
Kargil war was sluggish as it sought and obtained a stay of the Armed
Forces Tribunal's order quashing the 2009 policy to have a combat unit
commanded by a colonel at the age of 37 years.
As a bench of
Justice T.S.Thakur, Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Amitava Roy stayed
the tribunal's March 2, 2015 order quashing the 2009 policy under which
newly-created 750 posts of colonels were not disbursed across the army
on pro rata basis, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the court that
the response in Kargil war was "sluggish".
Telling the court that
the policy of giving the command of a combat unit to a colonel at the
age of 37 followed an examination of why the army's response in the
conflict was "sluggish", he said it was found that while an indian army
combat unit was being commanded by a colonel aged 41, his counterparts
in the Pakistani and Chinese army were aged 37 years.
The AFT order was coming in the way of promotion policy in the army reducing the age of a colonel to 37 years, he said.
The
tribunal quashed the January 21, 2009 policy which weighed in favour of
infantry, mechanised infantry and armoured corps insofar the 750
newly-created posts of colonels were concerned, saying that it was
violative of the constitution's article 14 (equality before law).
The
government move had followed the recommendations of Ajay Vikram Singh
Committee, which besides other things, had investigated the army's
"sluggish" response.
The government had created 1,500 additional
posts of colonel - 750 in 2004 and another 750 in 2009 - a larger chunk
of which was to go to these three arms for a better age profile of the
command structure.
Rohatgi said that the 750 posts created in
2004 for improving the age profile of combat units had been mistakenly
disbursed across the army on a pro rata basis, but since this did not
achieve the desired objective, a pro rata distribution of another 750
posts was not followed in 2009.
Besides improving the age
profile, the additional posts of colonel were needed to accommodate
these officers after they exited combat command as in the army
hierarchy's pyramid, not everyone could be be promoted to brigadier.
Having
some reservations on Rohatgi's stand, the court wondered how could pro
rata disbursal of the posts would not favour combat units as it would be
on the basis of their respective strengths and these were in a much
larger number.
"You can't affords to have disgruntled, dissatisfied and frustrated officers in other wings of army," it said.
Rohatgi however said that if the tribunal's order was to be implemented then the entire policy will have to be unscrambled.
Appearing
for the officers who had approached the tribunal, counsel Meenakshi
Lekhi contested Rohatgi's assertions, saying that A.V. Singh Committee
report did not only talk about the combat units but of a larger age
profile at brigade level.
Senior counsel Shekhar Naphade,
appearing for another set of aggrieved officers, said that 12
Lt.Generals have opposed the policy, but Rohatgi countered that they
were out of 84 but had acknowledged policy decisions rested with the
government.
The tribunal order said that government would create
supernumerary posts to accommodate Lt. Col. P.K.Choudhary and other
officers denied promotion on the basis of quashed policy subject to
merit.