The Supreme Court on Monday requested the Centre and the Indian Army to think about the case of 5 Army women brief service fee officers who have been denied everlasting fee as they have been assessed from 1999-2005 based mostly on an evaluation system that relied on an annual confidential report (ACR) due to which they failed to recover from 60% marks, the edge fastened by the Supreme Court in March for grant of everlasting fee (PC).
The officers in question approached the highest court complaining in opposition to the unit evaluation card (UAC) evaluation system that prevailed until 2005. This system was discontinued by the Army in September 2005 and changed by ACR-based evaluation coverage for grant of PC. However, their plea to be thought of for PC was rejected by the Delhi High Court on September 17 in opposition to which the officers had filed appeals. They have been discharged from the Army in July.
Senior advocates Huzefa Ahmadi and V Mohana appeared for the officers and sought to problem the denial of PC on the defective UAC system and the failure of Army to think about their distinctive achievements past the stipulated ACRs of the fifth and tenth year of service. “If the UAC assessment marks are eschewed, these officers will get far above 60% marks required by them to get PC,” Ahmadi stated whereas Mohana identified that the Court’s March 25 judgment particularly named two of the petitioners – Gopika Bhati and Sonali Singh, for his or her exemplary achievements and advised their whole observe document be considered for grant of PC.
Bhati was the one officer to obtain GOC-in-C commendation card for rendering emergency duties in Northern Command Sector and was half of Operation Parakram and Operation Vijay, apart from being a nationwide degree squash and tennis participant. For Sonali Singh, the judgment famous that she was the primary girl officer to be convoy commander for Pathankot to Leh in 1999 and was the primary girl to be the officer in-charge of Ammunition Dump, Amritsar throughout Operation Parakram.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain and senior advocate R Balasubramanian have been current in Court representing the Centre and Army. “We have gone as per the Court’s decision. The direction was to review the method of evaluation for future batches. If a better system has replaced an old one that does not mean that the old system is condemned.” Further, he argued that any concession will imply dipping the benefit beneath 60% marks.
The bench of Justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna instructed the Centre to have a thoughtful view because the matter concerned a small group of officers affected by UAC system. “These are officers who have made achievements. This cannot be ignored. You must add up their achievements while computing 60%. If there are vigilance and discipline grounds on which they have been rejected, we would be the last to interfere,” the judges noticed.
Both Jain and Balasubramanian sought time to check with the authorities and proposed to get again by November 12, the following date for listening to the matter.
Recently, the Court had directed the Army to reconsider the case of 72 women brief service fee officers within the Army who have been denied PC. On a nudge by the Court, Army reconsidered the record and agreed to grant PC to 39 officers. The Court had appreciated the Army for its truthful stand even because it known as for causes for refusing PC to the remaining officers. This matter too is listed for November 12.