Army promotion: Have approved Command Exit model, Govt tells SC

[related-post]

The implementation of these recommendations were made over different stages between 2004 and 2009 on basis of the vacancies in the select rank, as worked out by the AVSC. The Ministry cited the AVSC report to state that the upgradation of select ranks was aimed at “reduction in the age of Battalion Commanders and Brigade Commanders”.The government accordingly sanctioned the vacancies in the select ranks in 2004 and 2008.

The Ministry further defended the Army’s decision to allocate vacancies of 750 Colonels in 2004 on a pro-rata basis instead of following the ‘Command Exit’ model. It said “powers to utilise sanctioned posts within the overall authorised cadre in respect of officers up to the rank of Brigadiers and equivalents have been delegated to the Service Headquarter” by virtue of a Ministry’s letter in 2001.

It said the “Government of India did not take any exception” to initial allocation of 750 Colonels by the Army Headquarter since the latter was authorised to do so and hence there was “no omission” on the part of the Ministry in maintaining silence on the subject.

The Ministry was directed to respond whether it had approved the ‘Command Exit’ policy and if so, when and to what extent.

Additionally, a bench led by Justice T S Thakur had sought to know the basis of the Army distributing vacancies of 750 Colonels in 2004 on a pro-rata basis although the ‘Command-Exit’ model had kicked in.

The policy was quashed by Armed Forces Tribunal, compelling the Army to appeal in the apex court. The government had released 1,484 vacancies of Colonels by upgrading an equal number of Lt Col vacancies to be distributed in two phases called AVSC I (750 vacancies) in December 2004 and 734 in November 2008 under AVSC II. While the number of vacancies in AVSC I was allocated between various arms on pro-rata basis, AVSC II vacancies were distributed on Command Exit Model since 2009.

There is already a stay on the Armed Forces Tribunal judgment, which had held this policy to be in violation of right to equality.