Military tribunal quashes top appointment

GANGULY MOVED THE TRIBUNAL STAKING CLAIM TO THE TOP POST ARGUING HE WAS THE MOST SENIOR SERVING LIEUTENANT GENERAL IN ARMY MEDICAL CORPS

NEWDELHI: The government could approach the Supreme Court against the decision of the principal bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) striking down the proposed appointment of a top army doctor as Director General Medical Services (Army) and ordering the appointment of another three-star officer, Lieutenant General Manomoy Ganguly, to the post, in an order passed last week.

In its May 7 order, which some experts say may have been an overreach of its powers, ATF called the appointment of Lieutenant General Sanjeev Chopra as DGMS (Army) as “arbitrary, discriminatory and activated by extraneous consideration”. It added that the “recommendations and consequent approval” in Chopra’s appointment deserved to be quashed on the above grounds . By doing so, the tribunal went with the principle of seniority, but it may have overlooked the issue of “suitability” as argued by the government, and some experts say it may have also exceeded its powers by ordering the appointment of Ganguly.

“It seems to be an unusual order as it is the government’s prerogative to make such appointments. Seniority plays a role but suitability is also important,” said Lieutenant General BK Chopra (retd), who headed the Armed Forces Medical Services from 2014 to 2016. The aspect of suitability was discussed in AFT proceedings.

The government could file an appeal against the AFT order in SC, said officials familiar with the matter. “Nothing stops the government from moving the top court against the order. It’s quite likely,” said a former administrative member of an AFT regional bench. Defence ministry officials said the judgment was being studied and a call is yet to be taken.

Ganguly moved the tribunal staking claim to the top post this year arguing that he was the most senior serving lieutenant general in Army Medical Corps with the required residual service of a year. The critical post of DGMS (Army) has been vacant since November 1, 2017, due to a stay order issued by AFT on September 2, 2017, which was later upheld by SC in an order dated November 10, 2017.

That, too, was on account of a case filed in the tribunal by Ganguly last July, claiming he was overlooked for promotion from major General to Lieutenant General. The tribunal said he should be promoted. The government challenged that order in SC but lost in November last year.

The AFT has issued a direction to the government to appoint the applicant, Ganguly, to the post of DGMS (Army) “as expeditiously as possible and certainly not later than one month from” the day of the passing of the order (May 7). “The stay directed in the order of 02.09.2017 is thus made absolute till the time judgment dated 07.05.2018 is implement,” it said.

In the second litigation in the AFT, Ganguly argued that even after being empanelled for promotion to the rank of lieutenant general by the defence ministry on January 19, 2018, and being the most senior officer, he was “willfully denied” the position of DGMS (Army). But the government cited a circular dated July 10, 1992, contending that appointment to the post of DGMS (Army) “is to be tenated not only by seniority but also by suitability”.

But AFT was of the view that having been empanelled and promoted to lieutenant general, Ganguly fulfilled the criteria of merit “and thus is an eminently suitable candidate whereupon his seniority becomes a decisive factor to make him eligible to be appointed as DGMS (Army)”. It said Ganguly’s name wasn’t even included in the panel of officers shortlisted for the top post.