AFT declines to quash action against Major General for irregularities in medicine purchase

The AFT has ruled that cognisance of such a complaint could be taken in matters of the purchase of medicines and that this was as per a new policy that was put in place by the Army HQs in 2023.

The officer was the Commandant of 166 Military Hospital, Jammu, from August 2018 to January 2020 in the rank of Brigadier. In March 2020, he received a letter which contained allegations accusing him of favouritism, contractual irregularities in the procurement of medicine, etc. The General stated before the AFT that these accusations were false and that all procurements had been done as per the laid down procedure.

The author of the typed letter did not disclose their identity, but the officer was asked to pay Rs 80 lakh with date, time, and place, where the same would be deposited at the MH at Jammu. The officer stated before AFT that he brought the matter to the notice of his superior which was conceived as a prank.

Thereafter, between June 2020 and September 2020, five complaints were received by the GOC-in-C Northern Command and GOC 16 Corps against various officers and other people serving at the MH Jammu. The allegations were that some vendors which were awarded contracts were sister concerns.

Following the receipt of the anonymous/pseudo-anonymous complaints, the GOC 16 Corps appointed an officer of the rank of Brigadier to conduct a One Man Inquiry.

The Major General stated before the AFT that he was not called to depose before the inquiry, neither was he apprised about any allegations, nor did the officer obtain any clarification from him. The officer drew his own findings based on the statement of the witnesses as per his own whims and fancies, the Major General stated.

A Court of Inquiry was ordered based on the findings of the One Man Inquiry. Even as this inquiry was pending, the officer was approved for the rank of Major General and was promoted and posted as Commandant, Army Institute of Cardiac Thoracic Sciences (AICTS), Pune.

In March 2023, he was attached to HQs 16 Corps for disciplinary action. The officer alleged before the AFT that efforts had been made to stop his promotion but these did not succeed.

The AFT, in its order, referred to the latest policy on the subject has been issued by Additional Directorate General Discipline & Vigilance, Adjutant General’s Branch IHQ of MoD (Army) vide its letter No. 61639/Gen/AG/DV-4(A), dated April 11, 2023, titled ‘Investigation undertaken on Anonymous and Pseudonymous Complaints’.

This policy reiterates that anonymous/pseudonymous complaints against Army personnel containing verifiable allegation must be investigated and such complaints should be examined at appropriate level. The AFT found that ordering a one-man inquiry was the correct thing to do under these provisions.

The AFT bench also did not find anything incorrect with the order imposing a Discipline and Vigilance (DV) ban on the General while facing disciplinary action and refused to quash the order.