No serving officer has a right to a permanent commission, eligibility must conform to established policies, overriding any inadvertent errors in promotions or advertisements.

Headnote:(A) Air Force Act, 1950 - Section 27 - Advertisement for Short Service Commission - Eligibility for Permanent Commission - Age limit specified in advertisement contradicted by internal rules - Petitioner’s claim denied as he had availed two attempts and was overage on subsequent applications. (Paras 2, 3, 6, 11)

(B) Legal Principles - SSC Officers have no inherent right to Permanent Commission - Consideration must align with extant rules; errors in advertisement do not create rights contrary to established criteria. (Paras 3, 8, 11)

(C)

Issues: The main issues include the contradiction between the advertisement and service rules regarding age eligibility and the claim of entitlement to an additional chance for permanent commission. (Paras 5, 6, 8)

Findings of Court:
The Armed Forces Tribunal correctly noted that the petitioner cannot be granted additional chances due to overage status, following known Guidelines and previous decisions. (Paras 4-9)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court concluded that inadvertent errors in the advertisement do not establish eligibility contrary to statutory provisions. Furthermore, past opportunities taken by the petitioner preclude further claims for consideration. (Paras 7-10)

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. background of the application for permanent commission. (Para 1 , 2)
2. insights from the aft dismissal reasoning. (Para 3)
3. arguments from both parties regarding eligibility. (Para 4 , 5)
4. contradictions in the advertisement and instructions. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
5. precedent and distinct circumstances in previous decisions. (Para 9 , 10)
6. no entitlement to permanent commission as a right. (Para 11)
7. conclusion of the judgment. (Para 12)

JUDGMENT

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

Amit Bansal, J. The present petition impugns order dated 10th February, 2020 passed in OA No.1548/2019 whereby the said OA was dismissed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (AFT). The said OA was filed on behalf of the petitioner, seeking following reliefs:

"(a) Set aside the impugned order dated 04.04.2019;

(b) Direct the respondents, particularly Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, to immediately consider the applicant for an interview vide a third chance before the Departmental Special Permanent Commission Selection Board; or in the alternative,

2. The petitioner, a serving Wing Commander in Indian Air Force having date of birth as 24.07.1983, applied for grant of Short Service Commission (SSC) in Army Medical Corps (AMC) on the basis of advertisement published in December, 2007. The said advertisement, inter alia, provided that on completion of two years service, SSC Officers are eligible for Departmental Permanent Commission provided they have not attained the age of 30 years on 31st December, 2007. The petitioner was granted SSC on 25th April, 2008. In terms of the aforesaid provision of the advertisement, the petitioner upon completion of two years of service as an SSC Medical Officer, applied for permanent commission. However, the Selection Board held in December, 2010 and in June, 2011, did not grant permanent commission to the petitioner as he failed to secure minimum qualifying marks in the interview. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for the third time for the said permanent commission in 2013 and 2017, however in view of the fact that the petitioner had crossed the age limit of 30 years as on 31st December of the year of receipt of application the petitioner was not allowed to appear before the permanent commission Selection Board. The petitioner submitted representations dated 7th May, 2016 and 26th February, 2019 which were rejected on 9th August, 2016 and 4th April, 2019 respectively. The petitioner also filed Statutory Complaints dated 26th October, 2017 and 25th June, 2018 under Section 27 of the AIR FORCE ACT , 1950 (the Act) which were rejected on 1st October, 2018 and 23rd July, 2018 respectively. Aggrieved by the rejection orders, 2019, the petitioner approached the AFT by filing the aforesaid OA from which the present petition arises.

3. The said OA was contested by the respondents, who filed a counter affidavit in response to the OA. The said OA was dismissed by the AFT vide the impugned order, observing/holding that (i) no SSC Officer can claim Permanent Commission as a matter of right, they only have a right to be considered in terms of the extant Rules; (ii) the petitioner applied for permanent commission twice in 2010 and 2011, but failed to qualify; (iii) thereafter the petitioner applied for third attempt at permanent commission in 2013 and 2017, but the same was rejected on account of the petitioner being overage i.e. more than 30 years; (iv) in terms of Paragraph 1(b)(ii) of Army Instruction (AI) No.74/76, serving AMC Officers would be eligible to take up AMC Examination for grant of Permanent Commission provided they are within the age limit (30 years) on 31st December of the year of receipt of application; (v) the petitioner was therefore not eligible for permanent commission in terms of the aforesaid Rules/Instruction at the time of his third attempt; (vi) merely because there was an inadverte