Officers Facing Temporary Illness Entitled To Promotion After Regaining SHAPE I Medical Category, Delhi High Court Grants Promotion To Army Personnel
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur granted promotion to an Army Personnel to the Post of Assistant Commandant which was denied to the Petitioner on Medical Grounds. The Bench held that the Respondents had not provided sufficient reasons as to why the Petitioner was not detailed in a Course that was mandatory to determine...
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur granted promotion to an Army Personnel to the Post of Assistant Commandant which was denied to the Petitioner on Medical Grounds. The Bench held that the Respondents had not provided sufficient reasons as to why the Petitioner was not detailed in a Course that was mandatory to determine the medical fitness of the Officers.
Background
The Petitioner (M Samundra Singh) cleared the written examination for the post of post of Sub-Inspector (SI) in the Central Paramilitary Organisation (CPO). Later in March 2004, he was declared medically unfit in the 'Physical Efficiency Test'. After re-examination, he cleared the same in December and after the Interview in 2004, he was appointed as a SI in the CRPF in May 2005. He was included in the 2005 batch.
Some officers in the same post from the 2004 batch approached the High Court claiming seniority at par with their batchmates. The Court directed that the petition would be treated as a representation by the petitioners to the Director General (DG), CRPF.
On 03.09.2021, the Director General passed an order fixing the seniority of the Petitioner (M Samundra Singh) as SI/GD on 30.04.2004. Following this development, a Board of Officers was constituted to reassign the seniority of the petitioner in the rank of Inspector/GD. He was found fit to be included in 'Special Approved List' and an order relating the same was passed on 04.02.2022.
On 25.04.2022, Director General issued a list refixing the seniority of all the SI/GD for the rank of Inspector/GD, however, the Petitioner's seniority was maintained as on 17.02.2010 on medical grounds.
On 09.08.2022, the eligible Inspectors/GD, whose seniority was previously re-fixed were promoted as Assistant Commandants but the Petitioner's name was not in the list.
Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed a Writ Petition.
It was submitted by the Petitioner that the Officers who were promoted were junior to the petitioner in the rank of Inspector/GD, however, they were promoted while the Petitioner was not. The Court directed the Respondents to consider the Petition as a representation wherein the Petitioner claimed promotion to the rank of Assistant Commandant and seniority at par with his batchmates. The representation was rejected on 19.04.2023 on the ground that the Petitioner had not qualified for the Platoon Commander (P.C.) Refresher Courses No.151 to 154 on medical grounds and that he had lost his seniority with reference to these courses.
Dissatisfied by the decision, the Petitioner approached the High Court again.
Submissions of the Petitioner:
- The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that as per the Order, several P.C Refresher Courses were conducted between different time periods and the petitioner was not detailed for some of these courses.
- It was contended that the Respondents jeopardized the Petitioner's future career prospects. Even though he was in SHAPE-I medical category, the Respondents did not detail him for some P.C Refresher Courses, the Counsel submitted.
- The Counsel stated that after the petitioner was placed under SHAPE-I medical category, he was later placed in SHAPE-2 temporary medical category by the Annual Medical Examination dated 29.12.2008, however, on 04.07.2009, a fresh Medical Board again placed in the SHAPE-I medical category.
- It was stated that based on the Petitioner finding his place in SHAPE I gain, he was entitled to seek retrospective promotion since he was in SHAPE I medical category during the P.C. Refresher Course Sl No 151 and 152.
- Asserting that during the period of Refresher Course Sl. No 153 and 154, the petitioner was placed in SHAPE-2 medical category which was a temporary medical category. The Counsel relied on the Standing Order dated 15.12.2008, as per which, an officer suffering from temporary illness was to be promoted till the attainment of SHAPE-I medical category. The Counsel further submitted that the seniority of such an officer would also be retained as per the Standing Order.
- Challenging the orders passed from time to time, the Counsel further asserted that since the Board of Officers had considered the correct seniority of petitioner and had opined that he was eligible to be on the said list, no contrary opinions could be furnished against the Petitioner by any other Orders.
- Referring further to the Order dated 04.02.2022 passed by the IG, Srinagar Sector, which found the petitioner fit for the Special Approved List, the Counsel emphasized that the respondents could not have rejected the representation of the petitioner.
Submissions of the Respondent:
- The Counsel for the Respondent referred to the P.C. Refresher Course Sl. No 151 to 154 and stated that the petitioner was found unfit for re-assignment of seniority in the rank of Inspector/GD. It was submitted that the Petitioner had lost the course seniority as he wasn't detailed in the said course on medical grounds.
- It was further submitted that, in order to be eligible for the Promotion, qualifying for the promotional courses was mandatory and to be detailed in the courses, the medical fitness of the Members of Force was to be determined.
- Stating that the Petitioner fell in the Low Medical Category and was hence not considered fit to undergo such strenuous promotional courses, the Counsel submitted that the Petition deserved dismissal.
Findings of the High Court:
The Bench noted the reasons given in the Order dated 19.04.2023, by which the petitioner's representation claiming promotion and seniority was rejected. As per the Order, the Petitioner was not detailed on P.C. Refresher course Sl.No.151 to 154 on medical grounds and thus he had lost seniority.
The Court perused the Standing Order issued by the DG, CRPF and noted that as per the Order, SHAPE-I was an essential condition for promotion, however, the Order also mentioned that in case a personnel was temporarily unfit, he/she would be considered for promotion after regaining medical category SHAPE-I and seniority would also be retained.
The Court noted the details of medical category of the Petitioner as per which he was in SHAPE I in two courses and in SHAPE II in the two more courses. However, he wasn't detailed in one of the Courses (P.C Refresher Course Sl. No.151 and 152), even though he was in SHAPE-I.
Expressing satisfaction with the contention of the Petitioner, the Court further observed that the respondents had failed to justify as to why the petitioner was not detailed for the P.C Refresher Course. The Respondents had only submitted that the record was unavailable, the Court held.
Unconvinced by the contentions of the Counsel for Respondents, the Court held that the benefit of seniority could not have been denied to the Petitioner with effect from 06.06.2008, in consonance with Standing Order 4/2008. The Court granted relief to the Petitioner stating that the petitioner was entitled for promotion to the rank of Assistant Commandant. It directed the Respondents to grant retrospective seniority to the petitioner as Inspector/GD along with consequential benefits, including consideration for promotion to the higher rank of Assistant Commandant with reference to the date that is 09.08.2022, when the Petitoner's batchmates were promoted as Assistant Commandant, with a condition that the Petitioner must qualify for the promotional course(s) necessary for the promotion sought.
Case Title: M SAMUNDRA SINGH versus UOI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1176
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava and Mr. Satyarth Sinha, Advs.
Counsel for Respondent: Ms. Garima Sachdeva, SPC with Ms. Divyanshi Maurya, Adv.