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.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 12 Feb 2012 10:07

anjan wrote:He went to court.


One point could be that he should have gone to Armed forces Tribunal and reclused himself from the AFT as he is the head. (whatever the technical terms may be)

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 10:09

^^kanson gave a pointer to the letter asking for complete agreement. Also see MG Devasahayan's article publishing the official letter stating all promotions were with 1951 date until 2006.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:10

Philip wrote:Unfortunately for Gen.Singh,his lack of evidence that there was more to his DOB affair-not being corrected within the IA because of a "conspiracy" by his superiors,whoever,has made it impossible for the SC to deliver in his favour.Had he insisted on a written note that it would be done from his superiors,or written to them requesting such a note in his acceptance letter,it would've nailed the issue.If his superiors indeed gave him an oral assurance and were genuine about it as he assumed,why did they not give him one in writing or did he ask for one at all?
All that is there on official records is his "acceptance" and since he became chief,in no way ws his promotion to that post affected.I feel he was poorly advised legally and by his supporters,some of whom perhaps wished to fire their own salvoes shooting from his shoulder!


Philip there was no conspiracy here , he simply invented it because he was an opportunist

He took 3 promotions based on 1950 DOB and at that time he did not raise a red flag or refused to accept the diktat from superiors. He took it quitely and quite willingly and quite happily.

When he became the chief he realised that his DOB as listed him Matriculation , Birth Certificate etc would help him win the day from the govt .....inspite of his past assurance when taking promotions.

He used MI and Media to his own personal benefit creating an aurora of a Honest Upright man fighting the system. Lots of Money and Liquor was spent on this self image creation.

Antony was/is a Honest and Lenient Minister was dealing with kids glove and he took opportunity of it.

The SC saw his game plan on this and came with a Just a Fair Judgement ...and He deserves exactly that.

Show no Mercy or Pity to an Opportunist.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 10:15

Austin: why would he have to get promotions under 1950 DoB from 2006 onwards if 1951 was good until then?

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 10:20

See this from the aforementioned article. THis was referenced in the NDTV discussion (with Rajdeep desai) Nelson posted. The link is the the MG Devasahayan article in statesman and gfilesindia.com I found on googling the name after hearing it on NDTV programme.

http://gfilesindia.com/userfiles/img_feb2012_3.gif

sunnydee

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby sunnydee » 12 Feb 2012 10:26

chackojoseph wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:I suspected someone will come and say this. The cause of justice is served through the prism of legal laws. Past judgments help determine jurisprudence . What comes out in this case is a matter of playing politics with who said what at what time and its impact. The question to the court was, my honor is at stake because by true DOB is being questioned and not being rectified. The answer was, your honor is intact - do not worry. But, you claimed DOB will not be recognized because of X, Y & Z - which have nothing to do with the facts on the DOB issue. Thank you very much.


IMO, you take a view that only you know the case and rest of the world is misguided (bold marked part).

The italics part is the problem anyway. While the chief is honorable, the rules are same for everyone.

You know the simple procedure of changing one's DoB or name in legal life? If in Mumbai, just go to a particular gazette office. Show them the true copies or give them attested copies and in 3 months it will reflect in the state gazette published. Buy, some copies and keep showing it when asked.

The DoB issue is not a current creation. its a dormant issue, which arose due to VKS own (legally since he has signed it) mistake during the filing of forms. it got mired into bureaucracy and not by design. The he did worse by undertakings without "subject to clause in the paper."

As, rest of India, four pillars and you say it, "its unfortunate." However, there is no evidence of politics before the age row kicked up. Even after VKS raised it leading to current crisis, every one tried to defend their positions. Law gives everyone chance to state positions equally, even if he is Ravana himself.

So, when VKS exercised his options, so did the other parties. All was in paper and proof. Your assertion (The cause of justice is served through the prism of legal laws. Past judgments help determine jurisprudence) has been looked into by top legal experts.

The attitude I see is 1) VKS is dead right 2) others do not and should have a say in this "logical" case. 3) If they say, they are anti-vks/justice. 4) Only VKs and his lawyer has applied mind. 5) others have simply played politics. 6) when rest of the people say that "we understand, you are honorable, but, here is what we have arrived via your papers, historical view and legal deliberations from top experts : They are fake. ------> Just sum of my observations and not criticism (every one is entitled to their opinion).

+1

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Pranav » 12 Feb 2012 10:35

Austin wrote:Lots of Money and Liquor was spent on this self image creation ... Show no Mercy or Pity to an Opportunist.


Any proof?

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:38

viv wrote:Austin: why would he have to get promotions under 1950 DoB from 2006 onwards if 1951 was good until then?


Well let me then ask you a counter question , why did he had to take a promotion under 1950 as DOB when he knew his DOB was 1951 and took 3 promotions based on the former and not on the latter and gave a written approval to it.

And if he was a true soldier and a man of honour why didnt he resist the temptation for promotion then and took the issue court if there was some big conspiracy behind such DOB..

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:39

Pranav wrote:
Austin wrote:Lots of Money and Liquor was spent on this self image creation ... Show no Mercy or Pity to an Opportunist.


Any proof?


Proof of what that he used MI and has paid jurno for TV channels discussion :roll:

Proof of what that he is not an Opportunist making most till the sun shines.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby negi » 12 Feb 2012 10:41

^ Austin a small nitpick, whether his previous promotions were governed by his DOB or not is highly debatable (one can have people of different age groups in a same batch) however what can be said with certainty is that COAS's tenure is governed by his age(DoB).
Last edited by negi on 12 Feb 2012 10:41, edited 1 time in total.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Pranav » 12 Feb 2012 10:41

Austin wrote:
Pranav wrote:Any proof?


Proof of what that he used MI and has paid jurno for TV channels discussion :roll:


Proof of your allegations that he used money and liquor.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:49

Pranav wrote:Proof of your allegations that he used money and liquor.


Got it from multiple source .......there is much to be said on this but now it really does not matter as the dice has been rolled.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 10:50

Austin wrote:
viv wrote:Austin: why would he have to get promotions under 1950 DoB from 2006 onwards if 1951 was good until then?


Well let me then ask you a counter question , why did he had to take a promotion under 1950 as DOB when he knew his DOB was 1951 and took 3 promotions based on the former and not on the latter and gave a written approval to it.

And if he was a true soldier and a man of honour why didnt he resist the temptation for promotion then and took the issue court if there was some big conspiracy behind such DOB..


Austin: He did resist. There are pointers on this thread. Just a little above in this thread there is a link to an article that publishes the official letter. There is a letter asking him to confirm 1950 when he resisted. Therefore, there was a deliberate wrong done.
After that he was doomed - if he did not accept it then he does not get his due (be promoted to be a general which he deserves). If he accepts it then you and other moralists say he should have fought back and do not give him his full due :).

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:52

negi wrote:^ Austin a small nitpick, whether his previous promotions were governed by his DOB or not is highly debatable (one can have people of different age groups in a same batch) however what can be said with certainty is that COAS's tenure is governed by his age(DoB).


Well you should not forget that he became the COAS based on what he accepted in written to his superiors for 3 promotions that he got. So to ignore the 3 promotions based on certain DOB and then debating the CAOS position based on favourable DOB is ignoring the facts ....which happened not once but thrice..

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 10:54

^^Promotions are not based on DoB. However why should he get the last three under 1950 when he got 5 (up to Brigadier) under 1951?

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:56

viv wrote:If he accepts it then you and other moralists say he should have fought back and do not give him his full due :).


Its better to fight for what is right and just the due will just follow ....atleast in my eyes it was the right thing to do.

Accepting something in writing from his superiors which he considers as genuine flaw , shows he lacked the spine to stand up for the cause and when he did against the govt he was just being an opportunist.

Which is to say make most what you get now keep the H&D in tight lid , when the times comes i will open the lid and use the H&D argument.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 10:57

Austin wrote:...
....

....

He used MI and Media to his own personal benefit creating an aurora of a Honest Upright man fighting the system. Lots of Money and Liquor was spent on this self image creation.

Antony was/is a Honest and Lenient Minister was dealing with kids glove and he took opportunity of it.



Austin you are some six times SSB reject or what?

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:58

viv wrote:^^Promotions are not based on DoB. However why should he get the last three under 1950 when he got 5 (up to Brigadier) under 1951?


Why should he accept it then ? Why not protest in writing and dont take the promotions. Why give it in writing that he accepted.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 10:59

nelson wrote:Austin you are some six times SSB reject or what?


Ah may be you should ask this to whome you defend now :rotfl:

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 11:00

Austin: so at least you acknowledge that a wrong was perpetuated in 2008? he was asked to commit to something that was incorrect.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 11:01

Austin wrote:
Pranav wrote:Proof of your allegations that he used money and liquor.


Got it from multiple source .......there is much to be said on this but now it really does not matter as the dice has been rolled.


:) so you refuse certain arguments as untenable since there is no specific proof (in your view) but then state the above as valid?

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 12 Feb 2012 11:04

While VKS media was reasonably managed, there are somethings he cannot be accused off : malpractices and misuse of authority to the extent disallowed by rules.

As far as AKA, he did not do anything that was amounting to political witchery and PMO was consulted at every stage.

Media was re(porting) from the handouts and releases.

SC was very much considerate.

Some folks indulged in VKS vs Govt and reverse. They are not a party to the process. it is unfortunate.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 11:05

viv wrote:Austin: so at least you acknowledge that a wrong was perpetuated in 2008? he was asked to commit to something that was incorrect.


Why should I , My Job is not at stake here ....he should have done that then ... he accepted it as a trade off for his promotions.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 12 Feb 2012 11:07

Austin wrote:
And if he was a true soldier and a man of honour why didnt he resist the temptation for promotion then and took the issue court if there was some big conspiracy behind such DOB..
A career army man is being threatened by the army bureaucracy to accept a certain date in the larger interests of the army or face consequences. The officer gets assurances from his superiors that this matter would be rectified. In hindsight, he should not have trusted the verbal assurance of his superiors (that itself will be a violation of army chain of command). No such rectification action is taken by his superiors and indeed an inquiry into the matter is stopped on orders of the then COAS JJ Singh. What comes out very clearly is that Gen. V.K. Singh did try to get his DOB corrected at every opportunity. But, it seem there is a "succession" plan as envisaged by some former chiefs that needs to take precedence. Even the AG talked about this succession plan being the corner stone of what the government is trying to protect - at the cost of the honor of its COAS.

You really think, V.K Singh is playing this game to get one year of extra service as COAS? Let alone going to the SC, even a statutory complain to the MoD by a sitting COAS has been unprecedented.

There is a succession plan the government is trying to protect and the reason why they have not reconciled the general's DoB issue.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Pranav » 12 Feb 2012 11:09

Austin wrote:
Pranav wrote:Proof of your allegations that he used money and liquor.


Got it from multiple source .......there is much to be said on this but now it really does not matter as the dice has been rolled.


Let us see what is the "much" that is to be said. How much money changed hands, who was paid, who took the alcohol.

It does matter because if there is no substantiation of the serious allegations, it will reflect rather poorly on the character of the anti-VKS crowd.
Last edited by Pranav on 12 Feb 2012 11:11, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 11:09

The members of the forum are missing the point in its entirety. It does not matter to the nation directly, if VKS got justice or not. At least not till the next war. However, it definitely matters to the thousands of officers who are serving in the Army and are looking to shape their career ahead. From the ringside, it is plain obvious to me that the deleterious effect of this SC action has shocked a majority of them.

I have been posting here on the basis of some knowledge which I have on the issue from Jan 2008, when the major acceptance issues arose and coercion of VKS took place. If those who think otherwise, feel they are better informed please enlighten me. I will be happy to learn.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 11:11

Austin: no your job is not at stake. His was and he had to make a decision when presented with an unjust action. The point is that there was an unjust action, after all even SC agrees is DoB is 1951, and AG says same, and MS branch also says that promotions until Brigadier were under 1951 date. And that unjust action was done for a reason. That is the cause for this ruckus and discussion. It has further led to the speculation is that the reason is some 'succession plan' or specific favour to a particular lt general since he is connected to PMO etc. See the various links to the media reports on this thread.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Pranav » 12 Feb 2012 11:14

nelson wrote:... At least not till the next war.


That is the main point. Why should the soldiers go and get killed when the guy giving the orders is a scamster who got a posh flat worth crores in some Adarsh society.
Last edited by Pranav on 12 Feb 2012 11:15, edited 1 time in total.

sunnydee

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby sunnydee » 12 Feb 2012 11:14

nelson wrote:However, it definitely matters to the thousands of officers who are serving in the Army and are looking to shape their career ahead.


Sir that opinion, if i can add my last two cents,pennies,paise is divided as well. There is no military consensus on the subject similar to there being no BRF consensus on the subject.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 11:16

Sucession Plan or Not , its Govt prerogative to choose who their chief would be , who the top babus would be and who will lead the intel. The Govt of the day has the right to decide.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 12 Feb 2012 11:19

Austin: It is government's prerogative. In that case it can do it without forcing an 'acceptance' for a particular birthday. So there was an unjust action and a forced acceptance. You can argue that it should not have been accepted and the general should have stayed a Brigadier but that is beside the point. The main issue is that until 2006, 1951 suffice and then from then on, for some reason the incorrect date was forced. Why? and for what reason.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21048
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 12 Feb 2012 11:21

In retrospect,looking back at the whole sordid controversy,there is one inescapable fact,also borne out by the recent land scams involving the top brass,that paraphrasing the immortal words of the Bard,"there is something rotten in the state of the IA".How,when and why this has come about is another matter.It appears that unlike the two other services,which interestingly are far better off in their modernisation plans,the IA appears to have the greatest amount of internal strife and external interference in its affairs.Perhaps the only silver lining one can expect from this fracas is that light has been shed on the nasty undercurrents at work for the first time,and oine hopes for a thorough spring cleaning to happen when Gen.VKS's successor takes over.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 11:21

sunnydee wrote:
nelson wrote:However, it definitely matters to the thousands of officers who are serving in the Army and are looking to shape their career ahead.


Sir that opinion, if i can add my last two cents,pennies,paise is divided as well. There is no military consensus on the subject similar to there being no BRF consensus on the subject.


I do not expect a consensus. Because there would always be a split on the lines of favourites of who are likely to win. Till a couple of days back it was in two parts. With VKS mulling resignation the split will be at least in four parts.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 11:23

Philip wrote:....Perhaps the only silver lining one can expect from this fracas is that light has been shed on the nasty undercurrents at work for the first time,and oine hopes for a thorough spring cleaning to happen when Gen.VKS's successor takes over.


Pipe dreams, sir.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Feb 2012 11:26

viv wrote:Austin: It is government's prerogative. In that case it can do it without forcing an 'acceptance' for a particular birthday. So there was an unjust action and a forced acceptance. You can argue that it should not have been accepted and the general should have stayed a Brigadier but that is beside the point. The main issue is that until 2006, 1951 suffice and then from then on, for some reason the incorrect date was forced. Why? and for what reason.


No one forced VKS to accept 1950 DOB , he simply traded it on 3 occasion to get a promotion.

He could have said no I dont accept DOB as 1950 and borne all the consequences of what comes out of it , that IMO is a more Honourable way ......but he thought it was better to accept promotion now and on all 3 occasion accepting 1950 as DOB.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 12 Feb 2012 11:30

ShauryaT wrote:A career army man is being threatened by the army bureaucracy to accept a certain date in the larger interests of the army or face consequences. The officer gets assurances from his superiors that this matter would be rectified. In hindsight, he should not have trusted the verbal assurance of his superiors (that itself will be a violation of army chain of command). No such rectification action is taken by his superiors and indeed an inquiry into the matter is stopped on orders of the then COAS JJ Singh. What comes out very clearly is that Gen. V.K. Singh did try to get his DOB corrected at every opportunity. But, it seem there is a "succession" plan as envisaged by some former chiefs that needs to take precedence. Even the AG talked about this succession plan being the corner stone of what the government is trying to protect - at the cost of the honor of its COAS.

You really think, V.K Singh is playing this game to get one year of extra service as COAS? Let alone going to the SC, even a statutory complain to the MoD by a sitting COAS has been unprecedented.

There is a succession plan the government is trying to protect and the reason why they have not reconciled the general's DoB issue.


I don't want to take sides, however, we have not heard from JJ Singh or any other concerned with the incident. So, the jury is out there. Part of the fact lies with Army's rank consciousness and internal politics and even Camaraderie.

Other than the last ditch announcement of "not for 1 more year tenure," can you categorically state that he did not want to extend his service life for one more year in past?

Govt is not trying to protect a succession like per say. There might be many more honest officers below the line who may also get affected and have their DoB right.

Sirs, I will just remind you, Just one year back, IA was faced with senior officers quitting as they don't see a future. Army was rejigging the promotions policy.

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 11:36

Other than the last ditch announcement of "not for 1 more year tenure," can you categorically state that he did not want to extend his service life for one more year in past?


As was being reported, VKS could have enjoyed the five years as Governor of a state, than hang on to this DoB. Why, is Governorship<<COAS?

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 11:39

I don't want to take sides, however, we have not heard from JJ Singh or any other concerned with the incident. So, the jury is out there. Part of the fact lies with Army's rank consciousness and internal politics and even Camaraderie.


That is one of the huge failures of the media. No one even tried to elicit a opinion from the other side. Instead media opted to read aloud from the handouts.

Conversely, the gentlemen in question never felt it was necessary to clear the air.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 12 Feb 2012 11:47

nelson wrote:That is one of the huge failure of the media. No one even tried to elicit a opinion from the other side. Instead media opted to read aloud from the handouts.

Conversely, the gentlemen in question never felt it was necessary to clear the air.


Possible. JJ is very much accessible. But, other than Def Min, none of the concerned spoke to media, if you notice. All who were jumping were Ex mils, analysts and some judges. Did it occur to you, why?

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 12 Feb 2012 11:53

I too find it funny, when renowned reporters from national media, acknowledge in private the murky hands of the former COAS and Joint Secretary (G/S), none of them or their media-houses find it worthwhile to take a scoop from their side. May be political compulsions.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 80 guests