MAJOR GENERAL I. P. S. DEWAN vs UNION OF INDIAS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1995 Supreme(SC) 351

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE B.P. JEEVANREDDYANDK.S. PARIPOORNAN, JJ.
MAJOR GENERAL I.P.S. DEWAN
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS.
Civil Appeal No. 3273 of 1995
Decided on 7-3-1995
Advocates appeared:
G. Ramaswamy, Senior Advocate (D.N. Goburdhan, Ms Pinky Anand and Ms Geeta Luthra, Advocates, with him) for the Appellant; Altaf Ahmed, Additional Solicitor General and N.N. Goswamy, Senior Advocate (Y.P. Mahajan and Ms Anil Katiyar, Advocates, with them) for the Respondents.

Headnote:
Constitution Of India,1950 - Promotion - Enquiry - Court dismissing writ petition filed by appellant at stage of admission appellant Major General aggrieved with what he says denial of promotion to rank General- He says that though he was several candidates considered for promotion and his record of service was best of all he was not promoted because of and only on account of adverse remarks made by General Chief of Army Staff against him appellant complains that while making said adverse remarks procedure prescribed by relevant rules was not followed nor was principle of natural justice observed- Accordingly he prays for expunction of said remarks and promotion to rank General –Held, Union of India Chothia4 in support of his-yet another submission that where allegations of arbitrariness are made against a Selection Board/Selection Committee one of members of Board/Committee should file a counter-affidavit explaining circumstances in which petitioner was not selected- Court are unable to find any such proposition flowing from such decision- That was case where neither relevant record was produced nor did any responsible person swear to an affidavit with respect to reasons for which petitioner therein was not included in Select List- That is not situation here apart from fact that there is no specific allegation of arbitrary conduct on part of Selection Board- respondents have also produced all relevant records which court have perused Government Branch Press support of his submission that administrative orders affecting rights of citizens should contain reasons - Court are afraid said principle cannot be extended to matters of selection- Unless rules so require Selection Committee/Selection Board is not obliged to record reasons why they are not selecting a particular person and/or why they are selecting a particular person as case may be- If said decision is sought to be relied upon with respect to adverse remarks made against appellant attack should fail for reason that memo containing adverse remarks in this case does set out particulars in support of same- It equally relevant to note that no allegation of mala fides or arbitrariness has been against Chief of Army Staff who made said remarks - Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT

B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.- Leave granted.

2. The appeal is preferred against an order of the Delhi High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant at the stage of admission. The appellant, Major General I.P.S. Dewan, is aggrieved with, what he says, denial of promotion to the rank of Lt. General. He says that though he was the seniormost of the several candidates considered for promotion and his record of service was the best of all, he was not promoted because of and only on account of the adverse remarks made by General S.F. Rodrigues, Chief of the Army Staff against him on 11-5-1993. The appellant complains that while making the said adverse remarks the procedure prescribed by the relevant rules was not followed nor was the principle of natural justice observed. Accordingly, he prays for expunction of the said remarks and promotion to the rank of Lt. General.

3. The adverse remarks complained of read as follows: "CONFIDENTIAL Adverse remarks of the COAS to be endorsed on dossier in the case of IC-12599LMaj Gen I.P.S. Dewan, MG ASC, HQ Southern Command 1. Consequent to a C of I ordered by this Headquarters to investigate into the mishandling of CBI cases of RC 19(A)89-JPR and PE 3(A)/9A-JPR by Headquarters Southern Command in 1992, it has emerged that Maj Gen I.P.S. Dewan (Ex-MG 1C Admn) now MG ASC Headquarters Southern Command failed to appreciate the nuances of both cases, and to apply his professional acumen and experience to their examination. He also failed to examine the cases in detail, or to carry out a detailed analysis and merely endorsed his views, based on the perfunctory advice of the MG ASC. He had merely applied his mind to defend ASC contracting procedures and did not consider the major issues involved. He is to be blamed for mishandling and closing the cases and for acting in a manner which is not expected of his rank and the higher responsibility entrusted to him as MG 1C Admn Headquarters Southern Command.

2. On analysis of the case, I find the conduct of Maj Gen I.P.S. Dewan, then MG 1C Admn, now MG ASC Headquarters Southern Command to be Advocates who appeared in this case :

G. Ramaswamy, Senior Advocate (D.N. Goburdhan, Ms Pinky Anand and Ms Geeta Luthra, Advocates, with him) for the Appellant; Altaf Ahmed, Additional Solicitor General and N.N. Goswamy, Senior Advocate (Y.P. Mahajan and Ms Anil Katiyar, Advocates, with them) for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.- Leave granted.

3. The adverse remarks complained of read as follows: "CONFIDENTIAL Adverse remarks of the COAS to be endorsed on dossier in the case of lC-12599LMaj Gen I.P.S. Dewan, MG ASC, HQ Southern Command 1. Consequent to a C of I ordered by this Headquarters to investigate into the mishandling of CBI cases of RC 19(A)89-JPR and PE 3(A)/9A-JPR by Headquarters Southern Command in 1992, it has emerged that Maj Gen I.P.S. Dewan (Ex-MG 1C Admn) now MG ASC Headquarters Southern Command failed to appreciate the nuances of both cases, and to apply his professional acumen and experience to their examination. He also failed to examine the cases in detail

Click Here to Read the rest of this document