Indian Army: News & Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 24 Jan 2012 13:41

Austin wrote:
Sanku wrote:Hardly a comparison, for obvious reasons. If Congress could sack him and did for a specific reason, even that would be better.


Well look at it this way , AVB never got an opportunity to even approach the court , he was kicked out in a clean operation let by Intel and Government of the day.


Yes, and there in lies the difference.

A Govt which has the moral authority coupled with acumen handles these issues cleanly.

A govt without the above to qualities tries the low level skulduggery that we are seeing -- and the result is a mess.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jan 2012 14:35

Sanku wrote:A Govt which has the moral authority coupled with acumen handles these issues cleanly.


You mean a govt with Tehelka, Coffin Gate , UTI scam has higher moral authority over govt with CWG , 2G and CAG scam then i agree ;)

I heard the same reason then that NDA lacked the acumen and experience and they bungled the AVB issue badly and that it could have been handled more gracefully.

I for one do not believe the current issue is because Sonia along with Antony is plotting in a dark corner of a room shit scared and trying to topple the chief , much like i dont believe ABV and GF plotted the AVB take over.

Its just an unfortunate incident that no government would like to see one self in , not certainly the current one who has too many on its plate of their own wrong doing ...... but if such incident do occur one has to deal with it ...its certainly not the last we would hear on Govt versus Def Service and in the future the govt of the day will have to deal with it what ever comes up then.

The good thing about VKS incident is this would be fought in a more fair manner and in front of the public eye and both parties will get a fair chance to present its case , compared to the over night intel coup we saw with AVB. So lets wait and see what the court has to say , accept it what ever it may be and move on.

The other good thing is in the future if any Defence Service ,IPS,IAS or other official strongly feels that he/she did not get a fair hearing from authorities , they would be more inclined to approach the court for a fair justice .....so the credit should go to VKS for thing this important step.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12411
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 24 Jan 2012 14:45

Austin wrote:
Sanku wrote:A Govt which has the moral authority coupled with acumen handles these issues cleanly.


You mean a govt with Tehelka, Coffin Gate , UTI scam has higher moral authority over govt with CWG , 2G and CAG scam then i agree
.


Will I have no doubts many within the BJP are corrupt. Truth be told the corruption shown in Tehelka of Babus in MOD did not start in 1998 and end in 2004, it could have been done today or anytime after. Regarding the allegations against George Fernandes by his Drunk PA, they have been proven false and cases have been closed by CBI even after best efforts.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jan 2012 14:55

From what i have read 3 army men and an american company has been charge sheeted in Coffin Gate scam not sure what happened after that ........ but in an era where every government in power had their own share of scam to deal with , the issue of morality in present context would mean the one that caused least loss to the nations in all these scams would have higher moral authority :lol:

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 24 Jan 2012 15:03

Austin wrote:
Sanku wrote:A Govt which has the moral authority coupled with acumen handles these issues cleanly.
You mean a govt with Tehelka, Coffin Gate , UTI scam has higher moral authority over govt with CWG , 2G and CAG scam then i agree ;)


Ouch! :)

The other good thing is in the future if any Defence Service ,IPS,IAS or other official strongly feels that he/she did not get a fair hearing from authorities , they would be more inclined to approach the court for a fair justice

I am not sure that this is a positive development. If VKS case makes approaching courts by the higest servants of the state a lot more acceptable, then in a decade or so promotions will be mired in a logjam of endless court cases Anyone offended at being passed over or out of a sense of mischief will just throw a monkey wrench in the proceedings by filing a case in our overloaded judiciary. Endless attendant delays in policy making and execution due to "interim charge" or "additional duty" becoming the norm.

I must admit that I don't spend endless nights agonizing about the very top echelon of GoI employees getting fair promotions like some folks here, I couldn't care less - my concern is impact on the institutions and their ability to get things done. By and large all of these top level employees are fairly interchangeable at that level (depending upon the institution they are either fairly adept at politics, fairly competent and usually a fine mix of both). Like they say, the cemeteries of the world are full of indispensable people.

This court business will perhaps end up making the promotions a bit fairer or actually unfairer depending how they are used or misused, but I believe that they will have a large negative impact on overall policy making and execution, which is what concerns me.

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 24 Jan 2012 15:07

^^No. In present day context, the actual definition of higher moral authority is the one who does not get caught in the scams even though he/ she may have been involved in many. Sorry for OT.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby geeth » 24 Jan 2012 15:23

No. In present day context, the actual definition of higher moral authority is the one who does not get caught in the scams even though he/ she may have been involved in many. Sorry for OT.


I do not agree wholly with your statement. While there may have been corrupt ministers in NDA, by and large ABV ensured those who were tainted didn't remain in Govt. In fact his second tenure was cut short to 13 months because he refused to allow the tainted ADMK minister to continue (Amma's elephantine ego did the rest with able swami's assistance). Same with Mahajan and even GF.

Vishnu Bhagawat was sacked because he was commie implant and was going against the Govt on policy matters. Case of VKS is totally different...infact the other way round.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jan 2012 15:36

Commie Implant ......ah evading the highest intel authorities of our country :)

The reason he was removed is because he shared a very bad relationship with GF , they disagreed on many matters and AVB was selectively leaking ATV information to media ( the hindu ) and in the end it was a case of disobeying civilian authority........ and GF was a sort of no nonsense guy ....so he was kicked out.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jan 2012 15:47

Badar wrote:I am not sure that this is a positive development. If VKS case makes approaching courts by the higest servants of the state a lot more acceptable, then in a decade or so promotions will be mired in a logjam of endless court cases


Yes Agree..... Adminstration will become impossible becuase the guy would say promotion de warna court chala jaunga :rotfl:

Having said that i know there are many cases in court regarding IA officer on promotion related matters...... not sure how long the court takes to pass judgement on that.

But i feel most would take such steps as last resort after failing on other fronts for grievance redressal , because if you act smart the government can always get back to you while you are with them ...and then there is always the case of post retirement benefits that may get affected or other administrative disciplinary action taken agianst known offenders . Not every one has the time and money to fight with govt.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 24 Jan 2012 15:49

Austin wrote:The reason he was removed is because he shared a very bad relationship with GF , they disagreed on many matters and AVB was selectively leaking ATV information to media ( the hindu ) and in the end it was a case of disobeying civilian authority........ and GF was a sort of no nonsense guy ....so he was kicked out.

But but but ... I thought Service Chiefs who stood up to the pusillanimous and corrupt politicians and backed their own opinions against GoI policy were the stuff of legends? Could it be that the "other" regime fired a service chief for not being pliant enough? But how can that be? {holds head in throes of cognitive dissonance}

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 24 Jan 2012 15:55

neither the Adm BV or the Lt Gen Kapil Vij affair were exactly glorious examples of civil military relations. perhaps BV's dismissal can be still justified but kapil vij's most certainly not.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby geeth » 24 Jan 2012 16:06

I thought Service Chiefs who stood up to the pusillanimous and corrupt politicians and backed their own opinions against GoI policy were the stuff of legends? Could it be that the "other" regime fired a service chief for not being pliant enough? But how can that be? {holds head in throes of cognitive dissonance}


That will be the view of not just you, but anyone who wears tinted glass

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby geeth » 24 Jan 2012 16:11

because if you act smart the government can always get back to you while you are with them .


Not only that, the Army/Navy/Air Force acts are more draconian and people say they were copied from British law after 1857 mutiny. I don;t know what is the case now , as there were plans to make changes in these acts to look more 'modern' (what ever that means)

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jan 2012 16:24

Badar wrote:But but but ... I thought Service Chiefs who stood up to the pusillanimous and corrupt politicians and backed their own opinions against GoI policy were the stuff of legends? Could it be that the "other" regime fired a service chief for not being pliant enough? But how can that be? {holds head in throes of cognitive dissonance}


The notion that politician are corrupt and babus are shrewed and scheming and plotting against the Defence Service is not totally correct .. The defence service do not operate in a parallel universe and they depend on good will of their own bosses and at a higher level on good will of babus and politicain to get the right job compared to their peers any one who is smart enough with it besides his own task makes it to the top. You are at the top only because at some stage in your career some one wanted to see you there and that some one involves politician , babus and service boss depending on the position you hold.

I know for a fact that AVB had some issue with his hearing and he was rejected for submarine service at the highest level but he took some recommendation from the then DM which over ruled the objection and he spent some time with Submarine service which in normal situation he never would.

In the end its the case of you scratch my back and I will scratch yours and we are one nice big happy family....its only when you scratch a little hard and your skin starts to peel you realise it hurts and then we have issues like AVB , VKS and others.

Lets wait for the other nice guy in the game called SC to speak up ;)

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chaanakya » 24 Jan 2012 16:53

Badar wrote:
chaanakya wrote:When there is no other appropriate remedy is available within the administrative setup sort of making the so called Deal with the Govt, Courts are the only available option and sometimes they also may not be able to deliver the Justice.

What will probably be left unanswered as well in the short term is if it was worthwhile to pursue a remedy at all, with all the accompanying fallout. Not for Vicks, but for the rest of us.


VKS action has broken one taboo and will certainly change the discourse in promotional affairs in Forces. MOD can no longer be sure that High officials would not hesitate to take Govt to the court. That , by itself,will put brake on many a manipulative thought process, if not all.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 24 Jan 2012 16:56

Badar wrote:
Austin wrote:quote="Sanku">>A Govt which has the moral authority coupled with acumen handles these issues cleanly.
You mean a govt with Tehelka, Coffin Gate , UTI scam has higher moral authority over govt with CWG , 2G and CAG scam then i agree ;)

Ouch! :)


Oh yes. :rotfl:

Because
1) Apart from UTI the other two are not scams.
2) And UTI scam was not a Govt scam

So clearly you comparisons are not really applicable, to say the least

Congress scams would run into many pages.
:rotfl:

I am not sure that this is a positive development. If VKS case makes approaching courts by the higest servants of the state a lot more acceptable, then in a decade or so promotions will be mired in a logjam of endless court cases Anyone offended at being passed over or out of a sense of mischief will just throw a monkey wrench in the proceedings by filing a case in our overloaded judiciary. Endless attendant delays in policy making and execution due to "interim charge" or "additional duty" becoming the norm.


Depends entirely on the Govt, if it decides to keep screwing it officers with blatant disregard to law, yes the courts will get jammed.

And indeed, with a Govt that murders Indian system, what use is IA anyway?

I must admit that I don't spend endless nights agonizing about the very top echelon of GoI employees getting fair promotions like some folks here, I couldn't care less - my concern is impact on the institutions and their ability to get things done.


If you were remotely interested in institutions, you would stop running a hatchet job on the chief and castigated the UPA govt for running down the institutions.

Why blame the murdered for the crime of murder while lauding the murderer?

, but I believe that they will have a large negative impact on overall policy making and execution, which is what concerns me.


I fail to see how mis-carriage of justice and random stupid political games makes organization stronger.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 24 Jan 2012 16:57

Austin wrote:
I for one do not believe the current issue is because Sonia along with Antony is plotting in a dark corner of a room shit scared and trying to topple the chief , .


Do not believe, know

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 24 Jan 2012 17:02


Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 24 Jan 2012 17:34



Well trying to defend the indefensible by flippant, hoot from the side lines at V K Singh attitude is all very fun.

But when institutions are being murdered, a more mournful tune would be appropriate.

I would suggest the "march of the Valkyries" -- if your choice runs to western music.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 24 Jan 2012 17:43

Sanku wrote:But when institutions are being murdered, a more mournful tune would be appropriate.
I would suggest the "march of the Valkyries" -- if your choice runs to western music.

I do enjoy western classical. Ride of the Valkyries is hardly mournful in play or motif, it is after all about gallant heroes being borne off to Valhalla.

But I think the X-Files music is appropriate in the current context, unless some direct evidence is forthcoming for claims. Old saw about extraordinary claims and extraordinary evidence etc etc.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21055
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 24 Jan 2012 17:58

Snce the issue in nwo wh the SC,let it unravel the knots of dispute regarding the DOB,documents,certs,etc.,which will have to go to the very root of VKS's entry into the IA to establish the true facts.The IA however has to get its act together to see in future that this kind of situ never occurs again,as the damage done to the institution and office of COAS has been immense.There was a post about the IAF not havig two recoding bodies unlike the IA,therefore such a situ wouldn't arise.

In the cae of Adm.Bhagwat,was he given the opportunity to speak to the PM on the issue and give his side of the picture? Uncle George was a maverick who was not know for his sense of procedure,or etiquette,harbouring dissidents in his house ,etc. I know first person,how another reputed IN chief when under intense pressure like Adm.Bhagwat,to promote an officer to flag rank/senior poting ,who was unsuitable in his estimation,refused point blank despite severe threats,and went personally to Mrs.G and explained the situ to her as to why the officer was totallly unsuitable.To her everlasting credit and her track record of listening to her chiefs like FM Sam M,Mrs.G. upon hearing the adimiral out agreed with him and scotched the pressure from within her party to promote the oficer.

It is this respect and close relationship with the service chiefs that Mrs.G. displayed which is why her leadership inspired her armed forces to score that decisive victory in '71,which shamefully the govt. of Dr.Sngh 40 years on pretended as if it never happened! It shows the utter contempt he and his coterie of parasites have for the armed forces.The Congress will rue this fiasco sooner rather than later, as one must rememeber that millions of voters whose families belong to the armed forces will see the mishandling of this controversy as being primarily the rsponsibility of the current (non) government.

ManuT
BRFite
Posts: 595
Joined: 22 Apr 2005 23:50

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ManuT » 24 Jan 2012 18:39

sukhish wrote:It looks like people in this forum have nothing but contempt for GOI. Army is great, may we should make army run this country, just like the way some of our neighboring countries are being run.

The quick answer to your question is no. If army runs the govt, then who runs the army?

Since BR can be a little overwhelming in the beginning let me respond to this. Same is the case with ex-servicemen having lost their limbs asking for their dues in courts, against tremendous odds or as we saw earlier 5th pay commission.

What the issue is revealing is that there can be such a big BIG gap, that even the highest ranked soldier must make his way to the highest authority of the land, and then get things done for him as a favour or as an act of charity.

Look at who is preaching whom about high expectations from the army. I'll take bribe, I'll give bribe but you must live upto a high standard of morality because that is what I expect from you. 

Army needs GOI because it does not have a revenue stream and is not run for profit motive but its success and failure alters the map of the country. A party only loses power. (Even that can be potentially 'managed' to it a secret in the 'national interest' 50 years later). 

As existing procedures and lines of communications have shown be not working new ones should be created, preferably with the public faces who have a background in this.

(typos)
Last edited by ManuT on 25 Jan 2012 08:39, edited 1 time in total.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Surya » 24 Jan 2012 19:14

another email from an ex army group - posting it in full warts and all

it has the document shukla has posted followed by
A Matter of Honour!
Salute to the General who stood by value, honour and integrity. In his tenure, he has worked with full commitment to the nation. His age controversy was pushed beyond a point of tolerance by a RTI by a civil officer (may be on behest of someone) and the reply given by the Govt tried to convey a feeling that General has lied. It put General in a corner. Which hurt him most and to save his honour a...nd integrity, he took the actions as per existing procedures and law with the Govt. And after finding no justice now he has moved to the court.
The age controversy has been created with hidden motives. There are various forces which to not like General. Why did he become sore in the eyes of vested interests? Please consider
1. He kept fairness in arms purchase procedures which affected certain moves, interests and arms dealer’s nexus.
2. He pushed for punishments for Adarsh and Sukna scammers and tried to keep army clean of corruption.
3. He resisted move on involving army in anti-naxal operations to the dislike of Home Minister.
4. He opposed the move to lift AFSPA again to the dislike of Home Minister and CM of J&K.
5. Army did not play political game on Anna’s character
6. Tried to assert his rightful position as chief and advised govt in a more professional manner again to dislike of the Govt.
Age controversy has been created to humiliate the office of the Chief who has worked for his honour and integrity. Those who want to understand the value of honour to a soldier. Please read the
Govt’s immature handling of the issue and lack of sensitivity and respect to the office of the chief is appalling. It will affect the moral of the army specially the young and the middle ranking officers whose frustration will rise. There is in any case so many case pending today in the court where in the Govt is taking anti soldier stand. Be it One Rank One Pension Issue or be is a case pending in supreme court where in a gross injustice was done with armed forces in fourth pay commission.
Political parties can win and lose elections. They can be in power or in opposition. But for GOD’s sake do not play with the Ethos and honour of the Armed Forces of India. Their emotions are very fragile (when it comes to their relations with their own country man and govt) though they have hearts of steel. We must learn what happened before 1962 war when Govt played havoc with the functioning of armed forces and avoided or did not consult them. If armed forces lose the nation loses. There is no place for runners up in game called war ( its funny “war and peace” is given in the first schedule of our constitution but same is not included in the Govt business rules)
The office of the Chief is an institution and Govt shall respect the same. Let us respect the honour of Chief

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Surya » 24 Jan 2012 19:17

apologies if this has been posted before

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ag ... 641083-all


For the record

•Gen Singh’s father’s battalion, 14 Rajput, certified on August 3, 1965, that the army chief was born on May 10, 1951. The army’s official record keeper, the Adjutant General’s branch, mentioned the same
•What the AG’s branch says is supposed to be the last word. Gen Singh’s birth year as 1950 was published as his father’s Part Two Orders as well
•The Rajasthan State Secondary Board’s school leaving certificate also says he was born on May 10, 1951
•Documents available with the Air Force Selection Board in 1965, when Gen Singh applied first, show his date as 1951
•Gen Singh’s old school’s scholar’s register records his date of birth as 1951
•Legal adviser on defence issues in the union ministry of law & justice clearly stated that the school leaving certificate is solid evidence to prove age
•Joint Secretary in the defence ministry, Bimal Julka, raised doubts twice about the claim that Gen Singh was born in 1950

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Surya » 24 Jan 2012 19:19

FWIW - what was done to Kapil vij is hard to forgive ever. I would flog those @#@#%@% for that. The IA lost the services of one of its finest minds who had the pakis crapping in their pants.
Last edited by Surya on 24 Jan 2012 21:09, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 24 Jan 2012 20:51

All,
Keep it clean dont get banned.

Kapil
Webmaster BR
Posts: 282
Joined: 16 Jun 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Kapil » 24 Jan 2012 20:57

Austin-
Can you elaborate on Admiral Bhagwat's spending time in the submarine arm.
I do not remember him wearing 'Dolphins' hence the query.

Please clarify.

Thanks,
Kapil

rajatmisra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby rajatmisra » 24 Jan 2012 21:03

]

Can someone give a link to that, or elaborate?
Last edited by rajatmisra on 24 Jan 2012 23:25, edited 1 time in total.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Surya » 24 Jan 2012 21:18

rajat - please edit you quote - I have edited my original and do not need to get into trouble :)


The public story is that during 2002 buildup, Lt Gen Kapil Vij in charge of 2nd Corp was changed due to 1- if you believ the govt - because he had personal health reason

2- if you believe media - he took elements of strike corp too near the border and the Khans satellites tracked and informed the pakis



The inside story is a variation of 2. and a good man was lost to a spineless Govt which did not have to bend over backwards for the khan.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jan 2012 21:50

Sanku , much of those statements made by you are politically loaded so i will give it a pass

Kapil , My personal conversation with him , we can take this offline if you wish to.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 24 Jan 2012 23:21

Austin wrote:Sanku , much of those statements made by you are politically loaded so i will give it a pass .


Sure, but this politics. Look at the letter Surya posted.

Why deny. This is nothing but politics at the highest levels, bureaucracy does not even have a dog in the fight.

anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby anjan » 25 Jan 2012 01:21

Badar wrote:This court business will perhaps end up making the promotions a bit fairer or actually unfairer depending how they are used or misused, but I believe that they will have a large negative impact on overall policy making and execution, which is what concerns me.
BS. People can already approach courts and the AFT for exactly that purpose. Organizations (except maybe the famed IAS) are steeply pyramidal. There are lesser people at the top. If all those cases at the bottom aren't having a great impact, 30 people at the top competing for promotions won't matter much either.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2012 01:27

Chengappa's Part II

A matter of Honor vs Propriety

Tribune analysis
Army Chief’s Age Row-Part 2
A matter of Honour vs Propriety
The second big anomaly
By Raj Chengappa, Editor-in-Chief

Among the first things that every Gentleman Cadet who joins the National Defence Academy (NDA) at Khadakwasla is asked to do is to write a brief autobiography. When Vijay Kumar Singh reported to the NDA on 13 July 1966 to begin his training, he wrote in his autobiography, “I was born on 10th May 1951 in Poona. My father is an army officer. I have two younger brothers and a younger sister. I first went to St Columbus High School and did my first class from there. Then I joined the Birla Public School, Pilani.”

He continues his autobiography in a matter-of-fact way stating: “In school I used to play all the games but was good at basketball, football and hockey as well as volleyball. I am also a good rider and was one of the best at school. I have also done a lot of hiking. I have gone up to a height of 15,000 ft. As for my hobby I collect leaves and sketches.”

Proof of birth

While he does come across as a confident and accomplished lad, the most important point is that he writes his date of birth as 10 May 1951. These are among the several documents that General Vijay Kumar Singh, Chief of Army Staff, cites as proof in his statutory complaint to the Union Government challenging the order to maintain his date of birth as 10 May 1950. It is also cited in his writ petition to the Supreme Court which is yet to be taken up for hearing.

In the first part of the series that appeared in The Tribune yesterday, it was pointed that the first anomaly in his date of birth noting occurred in the application form for the NDA examination prepared by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). In the form, Vijay Kumar Singh filled his date of birth as 10 May 1950.

The UPSC did point out the discrepancy in June 1966 when Singh was provisionally selected for the NDA after passing the examinations and clearing his medicals. Singh claimed in his petition that he then went to the UPSC’s office personally in Delhi and along with a letter from his father submitted a provisional matriculation certificate which gave his date of birth as 10 May 1951 and asked for a correction in the records.

In his statutory complaint Singh cites this as proof of him having given documentary evidence to correct his date of birth and also evidence that the UPSC had accepted it otherwise the UPSC would not have allowed him to join the NDA. As he stated, “ As far as I was concerned the UPSC had noted my date of birth as May 10, 1951 even before I was selected for training at the NDA.”

The MoD in its order of 30 December 2011 rejecting the statutory complaint made by General Singh states that, “There is no record either with the complainant or with the Army Headquarters or the UPSC to show that the UPSC had accepted the change in the date of birth. The complainant has also referred to some other correspondence such as submission of School Leaving Certificate which is not available with either the UPSC or in the original dossier sent by the UPSC to Army HQ. The assertion of the complainant that as far as he is concerned the UPSC had noted his date of birth as 10 May1951 is not supported by any document on record.”

To prove that barring the UPSC form he had consistently maintained his date of birth as 10 May 1951, General Singh cites a whole range of documents during that period in which it is listed as such. Among them is the SP Form-103 which every candidate seeking commission in the armed forces has to fill up before he appears before the Service Selection Board (SSB) interview. General Singh filled up his form on May 9, 1966 and in it had entered 10 May 1951 as his date of birth.

The SP Form-103 had to be separately attested by the DIG, CID and IB, Rajasthan (where he was studying) and the DIG, CID and IB, Punjab (as VK Singh had shown Hisar then in Punjab as his native place). General Singh states that verification done by these authorities on 26 June 1966 reflects the date of birth as 10 May 1951.

Counter arguments

The MoD in its order rejecting Singh’s statutory complaint points out that the five copies of the SP-103 forms were forwarded to both revenue and police authorities of Rajasthan and Punjab “for verifying the character and antecedents with reference to the place of residence of the complaint.” The implication was that these authorities were not vouching for the date of birth that Singh had entered in the SP-103 form but his character and standing.

The MoD then point out that on 9 May 1966 the same date as General Singh had filled up had filled up the SP Form 103, another form called SP-Form 44 was filled up at the SSB. On that the date of birth was recorded as 10 May 1950. The form also records the verification by the revenue and police authorities at the time of selection to the NDA in 1966 apart from other details such as his marks in the interview and allotment to the 36th Course at NDA.

General Singh maintains in his plaint that the SP-44 form “is prepared before a candidate is sent to the SSB well before the selection for NDA and is filled on the basis of the UPSC Application Form.” Perhaps he didn’t notice that it was filled on the same day that he had filled up SP-103 form.

The MOD in its order rejecting General Singh’s statutory complaint states, “The importance of Form SP-44 vis-à-vis SP-103 cannot be discounted since it forms an integral part of an officer’s recruitment, from the stage of his selection by the UPSC, training at the NDA and Indian Military Academy and till the allotment of a Unit in the army, recording his marks in the interview and details of the course, roll number at NDA and IMA and IC number.”

At the NDA, which is a three-year course, General Singh was initially keen on joining the Air Force and gave it as his first preference. But he recalls that his father, Colonel Jagat Singh, talked him out of it and advised him to join the army. After he passed out of the NDA as is usual all graduating Gentlemen Cadets are sent for a year to the Indian Military Academy (IMA) in Dehradun to do a year’s officer training course.

At the IMA every candidate has a separate Dossier maintained including personal particulars and training record. The second big anomaly occurs when Vijay Kumar Singh fills up the form for his Dossier and in the date of birth column he writes 10 May 1950. Singh had arrived at the Academy on 21 July 1969 and the form in question was filled up by him on 29 July 1969, eight days later. It was countersigned by an officer of the IMA on July 30, 1969.

Second anomaly

As an explanation as to why he wrote1950 instead of 1951 on the Dossier, Singh states that the “orders were to fill the column for date of birth as per the UPSC application form.” The MoD hammers that anomaly home in its order dismissing Singh’s complaint stating, “No order directing this is forthcoming on the records. If the UPSC had already noted his date of birth as 10 May 1951 as claimed by the complainant he could have indicated this date as his birth. However, the date of birth was indicated as May 10, 1950.”

The MoD further points out that the ‘Record of Particulars’ in the IMA Dossier reads as “Gentleman Cadet- Course No. — 45th Regular Course. Name — Vijay Kumar Singh, IMA No. 10303, Date of Birth — 10 May 1950; Commissioned into — Infantry, Personal Number Alloted — IC 24173, Date of Commission — 14 June 1970.” It also stated that the IMA’s Final Assessment and Confidential Report of June 1970 show the date of birth as May 10, 1950.

The IMA mix-up

Singh in his petition to the Government states that he brought the discrepancy in the date of birth to the notice of the IMA authorities at that point itself. He claims that the IMA then corresponded with Birla Public School, Pilani, where he studied, asking it to provide a certificate giving the correct date of birth which it did. Singh states, “Accordingly the date of birth by the IMA in my Record of Service which is sent to the Adjutant General branch (MP 5/6) after commissioning is also 10th May 1951.”

The MoD in its ruling shot down Singh’s claims stating, “There is no record to support his assertion. If the authorities in the IMA had corrected the date of birth as 10 May 1951, their Dossier, the ‘Record of Particulars’ and Final Assessment and Confidential Report should not have continued to show the date of birth as May 10, 1950.”

Singh, however, has other evidence to counter such assertions. In his petition he states that the IMA issues an identity card with a unique number that is carried by the officer throughout his service. Importantly, the ID card has 10 May 1951 as his date of birth. Also the ‘Record of Service IAFZ 2041’, which is prepared on the commissioning of an officer and his joining a unit carries a similar date. Singh was commissioned in the Indian Army on 14th June 1970 and was posted to an Infantry Unit, the 2nd Rajput Battalion, based then in Delhi.

The MoD in its orders is hard put to explain this contradiction. It relies on the opinion given by Goolam Vahanvatti, the Attorney General of India, who pointed out that the requisite checking was not done by the Manpower Planning Directorate regarding verification of the date of birth in Singh’s case at this stage.

The MoD goes on to state that the Record of Service was a document prepared by Singh himself and then countersigned by the officiating Commanding Officer. It charges Singh with “not correctly representing his date of birth in the form IAFZ 2041.” After faulting the concerned authorities responsible for preparing and authenticating the record, it concludes, “In the absence of authentication of 10 May 1951 as the date of birth, its basis for the Record of Service cannot be accepted.”

Conflicting records

By now, it is apparent that the two branches of the Army, the Adjutant General (AG) Branch and the Military Secretary (MS) Branch, were maintaining two different dates of birth for Vijay Kumar Singh. While the AG looks after recruitment and keeps tracks of all Gentleman Cadets selected, the MS takes over once the officer is commissioned and maintains his records of service and oversees his postings and promotions. There was no reconciliation of the records then and has not been to this date.

There is another peculiar turn of events. The UPSC rule states that the original matriculation certificate must be sent to the concerned Army directorate as soon as it is received. Though Singh passes his Class X board examinations in 1966, he received his certificate only in 1971 because of the oddest set of circumstances.

According to him, by the time the certificate is sent to his father’s unit he had been transferred out. It was then sent to his village in Hisar where it lay unattended till Singh came home in 1971 and discovered it. On the certificate his date of birth is shown as 10 May 1951. Singh said he had forwarded it to the AG Branch that year itself. The delay in submitting his original certificate, along with the anomalies in the entries in forms, would again compound his quest to correct the wrong he strongly believes occurred.

Tomorrow: The twist in the tale



No highlightin to let the reader make up their minds.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4787
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 25 Jan 2012 01:55

anjan wrote:
Badar wrote:This court business will perhaps end up making the promotions a bit fairer or actually unfairer depending how they are used or misused, but I believe that they will have a large negative impact on overall policy making and execution, which is what concerns me.


BS. People can already approach courts and the AFT for exactly that purpose. Organizations (except maybe the famed IAS) are steeply pyramidal. There are lesser people at the top. If all those cases at the bottom aren't having a great impact, 30 people at the top competing for promotions won't matter much either.


Agree. I find it curious that there is so much concern on the fall-out of the chief seeking redress through court and not so much on the govt not reconciling the matter based on the various valid documents presented. Why let the issue come to such a pass?

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Surya » 25 Jan 2012 03:43

Chengappa still has his flair for details and narrative.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2012 04:34

Lets not sterotype please.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jan 2012 05:29

This saga looks more and more like an incompetent MoD that did not have its work done correctly and as a way to thumb its nose at the General, forced him to accept a wrong date.

Seems the chief finally says, what the heck, he has nothing to loose now and is giving it back to this corrupt, stupid and ghamandi government.

More power to him.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2012 06:05

Its dangerous to be right when the Govt is wrong. And the Govt has the media with it.

People now forget that India was born out of a bloody revolt against British tyranny. Yet almost from its inception, the government here has suppressed liberty.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 25 Jan 2012 06:47

pandyan wrote:Is MOD/defence ministry male dominated? I wonder if we need a woman civil services officer to MOD to cleanup things. Nothing like a ferocious mom trying to protect the interests of the nation. :twisted: :twisted:

the OROP proposal of the 6th pay commission was scrapped due to the singular efforts of a certain female officer of MOD. gender has nothing to do with it.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests