MAJ. AMOD KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & Anr.

Posting – Of personnel belonging to Army Service Corps (ASC) in operational areas – Challenged on the ground that since ASC was mentioned as ‘non-operational’ corps in Lt. Col. P.K. Choudhary case, personnel of that corps cannot be posted in ‘operational areas’ – Held: All the streams of Army work and co-operate in order to form a cohesive organisation – Postings and transfers are a necessary incident of service – As per the oath administered to the personnel, they are duty bound to serve wherever they are ordered to – Matters of transfer should be left to the discretion of competent authority – To accept the plea of the petitioners on the basis of finding in Lt. Col. P.K. Choudhary case, would be to disturb the entire structure and operations of Army – Petitioners have also not alleged violation of any rules, executive policies or instruction nor alleged mala fide. Constitution of India: Art. 32 – Petition under – Challenging posting orders in Indian Army – Maintainability of – Held: Postings and transfers are a necessary incident of service – Grievance against the same, if any, cannot be entertained u/Art. 32, as alternate statutory remedy is available before Armed Forces Tribunal. Dismissing the petitions, the Court HELD: 1. The Petitioners have contended that the Posting Orders, posting them to operational areas/units is violative of their Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The Petitioners have, however, failed to substantiate how their Fundamental Rights have been violated. Postings and transfers are a necessary incident of service. Hence, the grievance, if any, cannot be entertained under Article 32. The 28 MAJ. AMOD KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA Petitioners cannot assail posting/transfer orders directly before the Supreme Court by way of Writ Petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution. If the Petitioners have any genuine grievance, they have an alternate statutory remedy available by challenging the same before the Armed Forces Tribunals. Hence, the Writ Petitions under Article 32 are liable to be rejected on the ground of availability of an alternate remedy. [Paras 6.2, 6.3][34-G-H; 35-A-C]

#2. The Army is comprised of eleven major streams. Personnel are imparted specialised training in their designated field. All streams work and co-operate in order to form a cohesive organisation. The ASC is a vital stream which is primarily responsible for ensuring provisioning, procurement, and distribution of supplies. ASC personnel provide the logistical support in the form of transportation, maintenance of vehicles, driving in difficult terrain, preserving equipment, and conserving fuel expended. To accept the prayers of the Petitioners merely on the basis of the contention that the ASC have been referred to as ‘non-operational’ in *Lt. Col. P.K. Choudhary case for the purposes of promotion, would be to disturb the entire structure and operations of the Army. As per the Oath administered to Officers and Sepoys, personnel are duty bound to serve wherever they are ordered to. [Paras 6.1, 6.4 and 6.6][34-D, E-G; 36-G-H; 38-B-C]

#3. The Petitioners have not made any submission that the postings are in violation of any statutory rules, executive policies or instructions. The Petitioners have also not alleged any mala fide against the Respondents. Matters of transfers are best left to the discretion of the competent authority, and should not be tinkered with, in the absence of a demonstrable violation of statutory rules, or an instance of mala fide on the part of the competent authority. [Para 6.5][37-A, C, E, F]