August 18, 2002	Sunday	Jamadi-us-Saani 8, 1423

NEW DELHI, Aug 17: India’s Deputy Army Chief Rajinder Singh Kadyan has complained to the supreme court that his appointment as army commander was wrongly denied by the government which he said had misled the court to do so.

They said Gen Kadyan had listed the federal government, Army Chief General Sundararajan Padmanabhan, and the military secretary among the respondents.

Though the armed forces are beset with court cases relating to promotions, it is rare to find such a senior officer approaching the judiciary, that too just a few days before his retirement, rediff.com web-based agency said.

It said Gen Kadyan has requested the supreme court to consider his curative application before his retirement on Aug 30, appoint him an army commander, and retain him “in service beyond the date of retirement” so that he gets to serve for the days he has missed out on account of the “wrong judgment”.

It’s a long legal battle that the general has fought. It began in March 1998 when Lt Gen H.R.S. Kalkat was appointed commander of the Eastern Command, ignoring Gen Kadyan’s claim to the post.

Gen Kadyan challenged the government’s decision in the Delhi high court and received a favourable judgment on Dec 11, 1998, from a single judge. This was confirmed on Dec 16 by a division bench.

The government, however, filed a special leave petition in the court and on July 28, 2000, the high court order was struck down.

The supreme court also rejected Gen Kadyan’s subsequent review petition.

The general, however, filed a petition under Article 32 [remedies for enforcement of fundamental rights] of the constitution, which too was rejected, but the court left open the option of filing a curative petition. Gen Kadyan has now used that option to re-approach the court.

In the latest petition, the general says that according to the rules, selection “through comparative merit is resorted to only for promotion from one rank to the next higher rank. No such comparison is ever resorted to for appointments to various posts in the same rank.”

Since he had already been promoted to the rank of lieutenant general in April 1997, he argues, no further selection was required for his appointment to the post of army commander, which is held by an officer of the rank of lieutenant general.

Gen Kadyan has given the example of Lt Gen M.R. Sharma, who had moved a statutory complaint with the defence ministry saying that he should be considered for the post of army commander, when Lt Gen H B Kala, who was immediately senior to him, was appointed. The government had shot down Gen Sharma’s plea on the ground that the army commander’s post was a “non-selection” post.

But when it came to him, Gen Kadyan says, the government took the “opposite stand”.—J.N.