UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus LT. COL. P.K. CHOUDHARY AND ORS.

Citation: [2016] 2 S.C.R. 426 · Decided: 15-02-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
[2016] 2 S.C.R. 426 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
v. 
LT. COL. P.K. CHOUDHARY AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 3208of2015) 
FEBRUARY 15,2016 
[T. S. THAKUR, CJI AND KURIAN JOSEPH, J.] 
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 - s. 31 - Restructuring of 
officers' cadre of the-Army - Recommendations by the AVS Committee 
- Sanction of additional vacancies in the rank of Colo11e/ -
Additio11a/ vaca11cies released in two phases - Fist tranche of 
vaca11cy distributed amongst Arms, Arms Support and service 011 
pro rota basis - Denial of pro-rota share in the 2nd tranche of the 
additio11al vaca11cies released by the Governmelll - Governme11t 
policy, chal/e11ge to, by the respo11de11ts, serving in the Arms Support 
and Service Corps of the Army- Tribunal quashed the policy ci11eular 
issued by the Government of l11dia - Issua11ce of directio11 to U11io11 
of J11dia to co11sider the respo11dents for promotio11 to the ra11k of 
Co/011el by creati11g supernumerary posts - 011 appeal, held: The 
Commiltee recommended lowering of age profile a11d consequent 
creatio11 of additio11a/ vacancies for Arms and Arms Support-
Operatio11al U11its(Armoured Corps, Infantry, Mecha11ised I11fa11try, 
Artillery, AD, Engi11eers a11d sig11als) a11d not for services stream 
(ASC, AOC, EME a11d other Minor Corps) - Since ASC, AOC, EME 
Officers did 11ot be11efit, there was neither a11y violatio11 of the 
recomme11datio11s made by Committee 11or was the distributio11 of 
the additio11a/ vaca11cies discrimi11atory - Recommendations of the 
Committee regarding allocation of additional vacancies on 
"Command Exit Model" basis was accepted by the Government and 
a/location of first tranche of 750 vaca11cies by Army Headquarters 
on pro rota basis co11trary to the Government decisio11 a11d the 
G recommendations of the Committee did not affect the validity of the 
decision nor amounts to reversal of the said decision - There was 
110 illegality, irregularity or unfairness i11 the mat/er of a/location 
of vacancies to Arms Support on "Command Exit Model" principle 
- A/location of 7 34 vacancies, comprising second tranche, on 
.standalone basis, is the only right method for allocation - Further, 
H 
426 
/ 
UNION OF INDIA 
v. LT. COL. P. K. CHOUDHARY 
427 
the officers .in service streams do not constitute a single cadre with 
those serving i11 Arms and Arms Support for purposes of allocation 
of additional vacancies - There is no basis for the submission that 
/egitimate expectation arose in the minds of the respondents that 
they shall be promoted to the next rank simultaneously with the 
officers ·serving in Arms or Anns Support - Thus, the order passed 
by the tribunal set aside __:-Issuance of direction to appellants to 
create 141 additional posts of Colonel to be allocated to 'Combat 
Support' streain - Service Law. 
Armed Forces - Command tenure - Scope of judicial review 
- Held: Command tenure is a policy matter - Scope of judicial review 
is extremely .. limited - Defence experts or the Government to 
determine the tenure of a commanding officer for Arms or Arms 
Support having regard to variety of factors - Stipulation of a 
command tenure of four years for Arms Support Officers taking 
into consideration of the nature of duties and the need for battle 
preparedness of the force not arbitrary as to call for interference 
by/he Court/tribunal - Judicial review. 
Administrative law - Legitimate expectation - Concept of -
Held: Arises out of .a reasonable expectation of being treated in· a 
certain way by an administrative authority even though the person 
who has such an expectation has no right in law to receive the 
benefit expected by him - Any such expectation can arise from an 
"express promise" or a "consistent course of practice or procedure" 
which the person claiming the benefit may reasonably expect to 
continue - If denial of legitimate expectation in a given case amounts 
to denial of a guaranteed right, the same can be questioned u/Art.14 
of the Constitution but a claim based on mere legitimate expectation 
.without anything more cannot ipso facto give a .dght to invoke these 
principles. 
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court 
· HELD: 1. The order passed by the tribunal is set aside and the 
appellants are directed to create 141 additional posts of Colonel 
to be allocated. to 'Combat Support' stream for being utilized by 
appointing officers who are eligible for promotions against the 
same as in the year 2009 over a peri

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.