Re-examine case of Army top legal officer: AFT
Vijay Mohan/TNS
Chandigarh, June 15
Directing the Chief of Army Staff to re-examine the case where the Army’s top legal officer, a Major General, had earlier been blamed for administrative lapses, but his name was later omitted in the orders passed in the case by the GOC-in-C, Central Command, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has held that such actions indicate lack of transparency in the higher defence hierarchy.
“We direct the Chief of Army Staff to re-examine as to why the administrative action on the subject remained incomplete for nearly three years. In this period, two Brigadiers PS Rathore and UK Chopra were investigated upon, apportioned some degree of supervisory lapse, but their names were conveniently omitted from the directions of the GOC-in-C, who has not recorded any reasons for such omission,” the tribunal’s Bench comprising Justice HN Sarma amd Lt Gen KPD Samanta said today while allowing a petition filed by Lt Col Mukul Dev, who had challenged the censure awarded to him in the case.
A court of inquiry (COI) constituted by Central Command into allegations of publishing wrong official orders had held Brig PS Rathore, now Major General and posted as the Judge Advocate General at Army Headquarters, Brig UK Chopra, then Brigadier (Administration) at Central Command, a Colonel and three Lieutenant Colonels responsible for the lapses.
Observing that such incomplete administrative actions at the level of Command Headquarters by an Army Commander is not seen often and was indicative of lack of transparency and non-application of mind, the Bench said.
“The Army Chief must issue directions to rectify such lapses in Central Command,” the Bench said. “Actions like withholding information or not assigning adequate reasons while dealing with such cases, especially by senior officers, compounds the lack of transparency leading to denial of justice, apart from the vices of not rendering public service in a holistic way,” the Bench remarked.
While setting aside the censure awarded to Lt Col Mukul Dev, the Bench held that the alleged lapse on his part lies unsubstantiated.
Click here
Vijay Mohan/TNS
Chandigarh, June 15
Directing the Chief of Army Staff to re-examine the case where the Army’s top legal officer, a Major General, had earlier been blamed for administrative lapses, but his name was later omitted in the orders passed in the case by the GOC-in-C, Central Command, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has held that such actions indicate lack of transparency in the higher defence hierarchy.
“We direct the Chief of Army Staff to re-examine as to why the administrative action on the subject remained incomplete for nearly three years. In this period, two Brigadiers PS Rathore and UK Chopra were investigated upon, apportioned some degree of supervisory lapse, but their names were conveniently omitted from the directions of the GOC-in-C, who has not recorded any reasons for such omission,” the tribunal’s Bench comprising Justice HN Sarma amd Lt Gen KPD Samanta said today while allowing a petition filed by Lt Col Mukul Dev, who had challenged the censure awarded to him in the case.
A court of inquiry (COI) constituted by Central Command into allegations of publishing wrong official orders had held Brig PS Rathore, now Major General and posted as the Judge Advocate General at Army Headquarters, Brig UK Chopra, then Brigadier (Administration) at Central Command, a Colonel and three Lieutenant Colonels responsible for the lapses.
Observing that such incomplete administrative actions at the level of Command Headquarters by an Army Commander is not seen often and was indicative of lack of transparency and non-application of mind, the Bench said.
“The Army Chief must issue directions to rectify such lapses in Central Command,” the Bench said. “Actions like withholding information or not assigning adequate reasons while dealing with such cases, especially by senior officers, compounds the lack of transparency leading to denial of justice, apart from the vices of not rendering public service in a holistic way,” the Bench remarked.
While setting aside the censure awarded to Lt Col Mukul Dev, the Bench held that the alleged lapse on his part lies unsubstantiated.
Click here
Exp:56%
No comments:
Post a Comment
Indian Military Veterans Viewers, ..
Each of you is part of the Indian Military Veterans message.
We kindly request you to make healthy use of this section which welcomes the freedom of expression of the readers.
Note:
1. The comments posted here are the readers' own comments. Veterans news is not responsible for this in any way.
2. The Academic Committee has the full right to reject, reduce or censor opinion.
3. Personal attacks, rude words, comments that are not relevant to the work will be removed
4. We kindly ask you to post a comment using their name and the correct email address.
- INDIAN MILITARY VETERANS- ADMIN