UNION OF INDIA vs. BRIGADIER JAVED IQBAL

                                                                   REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION                          CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2560 OF 2022 Union of India & Ors.               .… Appellant(s) Versus Brigadier Javed Iqbal              …. Respondent(s)     J U D G M E N T A.S. BOPANNA, J. 1. The appellants/Union of India & Ors. are before this Court in this appeal, assailing the order dated 07.01.2022 passed   by   the   Armed   Forces   Tribunal,   Regional   Bench, Lucknow (for short, ‘AFT’) in OA No.619 of 2021. Through the said order the AFT has allowed the OA and held that the respondent is entitled to promotion to the post of Additional Major   General   (Litigation)   in   the   Judge   Advocate   General’s Branch   with   all   consequential   benefits   from   the   date   of 1 declassification   of   No.1   Selection   Board’s   result   on 05.05.2021.   The   order   was   directed   to   be   implemented forthwith.  The brief facts are; the respondent is an officer of the 2. 1989 Batch and is presently serving as Brigadier in the Judge Advocate General (for short, ‘JAG’) branch of the Military. He has put in 33 years of service. The respondent is presently designated   as   the   Deputy   Judge   Advocate   General.   The promotion to which the respondent claims entitled is to the rank   of   Major   General   which   corresponds   to   the   post   of Additional   Judge   Advocate   General.   The   rank   of   Major General in the JAG Branch had fallen vacant on 01.12.2020. The No.1 Selection Board comprising of (i) Chief of the Army Staff,   (ii)   Vice   Chief   of   the   Army   Staff   (iii)   06   Army Commanders and (iv) the Military Secretary, on consideration in its meeting on 26.10.2020 recommended the respondent for   promotion.   It   is   the   case   of   the   respondent   that   after clearance by the Selection Board the Chief of Defence Staff secured all information relating to the respondent, including that he had scored 94.482 marks which was the highest. With regard   to   the   query   relating   to   the   medical   status   of   the 2 respondent, it was intimated to the Chief of Defence Staff that the   re­categorisation   Medical   Board   on   12.02.2021   had indicated   that   medical   status   is   the   same   as   was   in   the previous pre­categorisation Medical Board proceedings   held on   14.08.2018.   The   respondent   at   that   stage   had   been classified as SHAPE­2 COPE­2. The Chief of the Defence Staff was   also   informed   that   the   respondent   despite   such classification continues to perform the duties of Deputy JAG of the entire command which involves heavy workload. The Chief of Defence Staff on considering all aspects, including the medical condition, cleared the respondent for promotion as the   medical   condition   indicated   would   not   be   a   hurdle. Pursuant   thereto   the   competent   authority   also   granted   its approval   for   promotion   of   the   respondent.   The   respondent contends that the Central Government had also cleared but at that stage, the Military Secretary who has no such power had introduced   the   rider   interfering   with   the   promotion   of   the respondent. The respondent contends that the No.1 Selection Board had considered the medical condition in detail and the Chief of Defence Staff as also the competent authority had accepted the recommendation of the No.1 Selection Board. 3 However, despite all this since the benefit of promotion was not accorded, the respondent filed an application before the     AFT seeking for the relief.   The case of the appellant is that in the Indian Army, 3. every   staff   selection,   whether   it   is   an   appointment   or promotion is done by following a prescribed procedure under the Rules. The appointment/promotion is always subject to meeting the medical criteria. An individual in the Indian Army is   selected   to   the   higher   post   subject   to   medical   fitness irrespective   of   the   Branch   in   which   she/he   is   required   to serve. Even if selected, the promotion would be available only if the medical criteria is satisfied. In the instant case, the respondent   was   placed   in   low   medical   category   for ‘Hypertension’ P2 (P) with COPE Coding C201P1El which is provided for in the Adjutant General’s Branch policy letter dated 16.02.2018 as non­promotable category. However, the Board   considered   him   and   recommended   for   promotion keeping in view that he was placed in low medical category on 14.08.2018 during Annual Medical Examination and the next Medical Board was due in August 2020, which could not be held due to Covid­19. It is contended that the empanelment 4 pursuant to recommendation of the Selection Board cannot be claimed as unconditional, since it is always subject to meeting medical criteria.  With   regard   to   the   medical   condition   of   the 4. respondent, it is contended that since he was suffering with ‘Hypertension’ the Annual Medical Board in 2018 advised him to take two drugs daily to control his blood pressure within the   permissible   parameters.   Although   re­categorisation Medical  Board  held on 12.02.2021  found  the  respondent’s blood pressure within the permissible parameters at 130/90, his medical category remained the same i.e., P2(P) with COPE coding C201P1El as he was still on medication. He had been advised to continue on one drug i.e., ‘Telmisartan 40 mg’, to be taken twice daily. Regarding the Re­medical board, it is contended that it was held based on the orders of the Chief of Army Staff on the request made by the respondent. In Re­ medical Board, the respondent’s blood pressure was found within the permissible parameters and his medical category was approved to be upgraded to SHAPE­I as he had informed the medical specialist that he was not on any medication. The appellant   contends   that   the   respondent   though   was   on 5 medication had falsely stated that he is not on medication. In fact, he had stated in his appeal dated 07.05.2021 that he was   only   on,   one   drug   medication.   In   that   view,   it   is contended   that  since   the   applicant’s   medical  category   was still   P2(P)   with   COPE   coding   C201P1El   he   is   not   fit   for promotion   despite   empanelment.   It   is   contended   that   the guidelines are applicable to all, irrespective of the Corps and Branch,   more   particularly   when   the   duties   are   to   be discharged in high altitude areas between 9000 feet to 14000 feet, which the respondent was required to perform at least on certain occasions if he was promoted to the post of Major General.   It   was   contended   that   the   respondent   was   not entitled   to   be   promoted   when   his   medical   condition   is admittedly in SHAPE­2.  5. The AFT having adverted to the rival contentions and also on making detailed reference to the documents which were placed before it has arrived at the conclusion that the No.1 Selection Board had taken all aspects into consideration and had thereafter empaneled the respondent. Further, AFT had also taken into consideration that the medical category of the respondent was upgraded to SHAPE­1 by a Re­Medical 6 Board held on 21.09.2021 after his blood pressure was found within   the   permissible   parameters.   Hence,   taking   into consideration   the   facts   evolving   in   this   case,   the   AFT   has allowed the application and directed grant of promotion.  We have heard Ms. Madhavi Divan, learned Additional 6. Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the appellants, Mr. Devadatt Kamat, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent and perused the appeal papers.  The factual aspects insofar as the No.1 Selection Board 7. recommending   on   26.10.2020   the   case   of   respondent   for promotion on obtaining 94.482 marks and at that stage, the respondent   was   in   SHAPE­2   medical   category   is   not   in dispute. The position is also that the Chief of Defence Staff on securing details on 12.02.2021 had declassified the results on 05.05.2021.  8. The learned ASG placed strong reliance on the circular dated 14.12.2012 relating to, system of Medical classification of Army Officers and consequent eligibility for promotion to select Ranks, which read as hereunder:­ “9.  Promotion   to   Select   Ranks   of   Colonel   and   Above. Subject to meeting all other laid down conditions, officers in following permanent medical categories are eligible for promotion to select ranks of Colonel and above:­  7

12. Officers in permanent medical classifications, other than those mentioned in Para 9 above, are NOT eligible 8 for   promotion   to   select   ranks,   less   those   eligible   for consideration by Special Review Medical Board or granted Battle   Casualty   (War   Wounded)   status   as   covered subsequently.” 9. In that backdrop it is also necessary to take note of Defence Service Regulations for the Army, relied on by the learned senior counsel for respondent, which in the preface clarifies that departmental orders and instructions are based on,   and   take   their   authority   from   the   said   regulations. Regulation   67   of   the   Regulation   for   the   Army   relating   to substantive promotion by selection, more particularly 67(b) thereof provides as hereunder :­ “67. Substantive Promotion by Selection – (A) xxxxxxx (a)  xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (b)  Substantive promotion by selection to the rank of Lt. Col and above will be subject to the medical fitness of the   officer   concerned   for   active   service   and   the permanent medical classification of an officer not being other than S1 H1 A1 P1 E1, S1 H2 A1 P1 E1 or S1 H1 A1 P1 E2. An officer whose permanent classification is S1 H1 A2 P1 E1, S1 H1 A1 P2 E1 or  S1 H2 A1 P1 E2 may also   be   considered   for   promotion   provided   the following conditions are fulfilled :­ (i) Such promotion would be in the public interest. (ii) In the opinion of a Medical Board:­ (aa) the officer is capable of performing the normal active service duties of the   rank   to   which   he   is,   being promoted,   in   his   present   medical category. (ab) any defect, disability, or disease, from which   the   officer   is   suffering,   is   not likely   to   be   aggravated   by   service conditions, provided he is employed on 9 duties   compatible   with   this   medical category   and   within   the   restrictions placed by the Board. ” (emphasis supplied) 10. The   case   of   the   respondent   was   in   the   medical classification S1H1A1P1E2 referred to therein. It was subject to   review   and   the   regular   Review   Medical   Board   had   not happened in the routine period of two years due to Covid­19 restrictions. The Regulation 67 of Regulations for the Army provides   that   an   officer   who   is   in   the   classification S1H1A1P1E2 also can be considered for promotion provided the   conditions   the   fulfilled.   Hence,   Regulation   67(b)(ii)(aa) noted above provides that there is no absolute bar from being considered   for   promotion.   Consideration   could   be   made subject to the other criteria being met and the Selection Board will have to keep in perspective these aspects. Though the assessment   made   by   the   Selection   Board   is   only   a recommendation, the approval to be granted by the competent authority would be relevant. However, the nature of the post for which the selection is made and the consideration made by the   Selection   Board   would   also   remain   relevant.   In   that circumstance, the nature of consideration made by the No.1 10 Selection Board forms a relevant basis more particularly in a circumstance where in the instant case after recommendation by the No.1 Selection Board, the Chief of Defence Staff had also taken note of the medical status of the respondent and taking into consideration the nature of duties to be performed as Deputy JAG had cleared the respondent for promotion.  11. The AFT having gone through the No.1 Selection Board Proceedings, Records and file noting sheets of the Army, DMA, MoD, noted the observations contained therein which enabled the   AFT   in   arriving   at   its   ultimate   conclusion.   Since   the sequence of nature of consideration made by the authorities concerned   as   noted   by   AFT   becomes   relevant,   we   find   it expedient to reproduce and notice the same which read as   hereunder :­ “(i)   No.1   Selection   Board   considered   the   applicant   for promotion to the post of Additional Major General (Litigation) in   JAG   Branch.   His   complete   details,   including   medical status, and restrictions arising from this medical status were available to the Board.  (ii) The Military Secretary's policy letter on medical category restrictions dated 14. 12.2012 was available to the Board.  (iii)   No.1   Selection   Board   recommended   applicant   for   the rank of Additional Major General in JAG Branch after him being  found fit in all respects for the rank. When Board recommended the applicant for promotion it was aware that he was placed in low medical category P2(P) for Hypertension with COPE Coding C201 Pl El.  11 (iv)   No.1   Selection   Board   recommended   the   applicant   for empanelment to the higher rank of Major General without any rider.  (v) After applicant being recommended by the No.1 Selection Board   the   file   was   processed   in   Department   of   Military Affairs and perused at  the level of the then Chief of the Defence   Staff(CDS)/Secretary   DMA.   The   then   CDS,   had, after   going   through   the   file   raised   two   queries.   The   first query   on   19.11.2020   was   the   "case   needs   to   be   bench marked with past boards". It was answered in the negative stating that there was no such bench mark. While answering the query it was also stated that when Brig Umesh Gupta, Brig Devendra Singh and Brig Rakesh were considered for promotion in their turn to Major General in JAG Branch the “cut off'” marks were 91 and now the same was 93.5 whereas applicant   has   scored   94.482   marks.   This   shows   that applicant is on a better footing than those officers who had been promoted earlier to the post in the past. (vi) After  the first  query  being  replied the  then  CDS  had raised   another   query   on   12.02.2021   regarding   medical status of the applicant, and in response to that query the CDS   was   informed   on   file   that   in   the   re­categorization medical board report dated 12.02.2021 his medical category was the same as that which existed on 14.08.2018 during his Annual Medical Examination, i.e. P2 (P) for Hypertension with COPE Coding C201 P1 E1. It was informed by Army HQ that "the officer has become low medical category (LMC) for Primary   Hypertension   on   15.04.2018   and   the   officer   was performing the duties of DJAG at HQ Eastern Command, which involved heavy work load of all legal and HQ cases of the entire Command. In spite of LMC the officer continues to perform   the   duties  of   DJAG  of   the   Command".  The  then CDS, after considering all aspects and finding applicant's medical category P2 (P) with COPE Coding C201 PI EI would not be a hurdle in his promotion, had cleared the file for approval by the Competent Authority of MOD/Govt of India. There   was   nothing   on   file   to   infer   from   any   corner   that applicant's   approval   for   promotion   to   the   rank   of   Major General was subject to meeting medical criteria. (vii)   After   No.1   Selection   Board's   decision   recommending applicant for promotion to the rank of Major General being cleared by the then CDS/Secy DMA without any rider, the same was also approved by the Competent Authority of Govt of India.” 12 The   learned   ASG   would   however   contend   that   the 12. medical   opinion   during   April   2018   records   that   the respondent is diagnosed with primary hypertension and the classification   was   indicated   as   SHAPE­2,   which   continued ever   since.   Insofar   as   the   employability   of   the   officer   with COPE coding C201P1E1 it was noted that the officer is unfit for high altitude i.e., 9000 feet and above. It is pointed out that   in   the   re­classification   by   the   Medical   Board   on 12.02.2021 it was again stated that the serving officer was detected to have hypertension during AME and ‘Telmisartan 40 mg’ tablet had been advised and the disability profile is P2 (P). The learned ASG further contended that as on the date of declassification of result on 05.05.2021, it was indicated that latest AME/RME/RMB etc. is to be forwarded within 15 days, which   discloses that   the   medical   fitness   was   an   essential   factor to be taken into account. It is in that regard contended that the respondent also being aware of this requirement had filed   an   appeal   dated   07.05.2021   wherein   the   respondent himself has admitted to these aspects of the matter and had sought consideration since the respondent assumed that he 13 would not be required to serve in high altitude area for which he   was   otherwise   unsuitable.   Further,   the   representation dated 17.05.2021 was made by the respondent seeking grant of waiver since he was aware about his disability. Subsequent thereto,   on   31.08.2021   the   respondent   requested   for   re­ examination   of   his   medical   category   so   that   it   could   be upgraded   if   found   fit.   Such   medical   re­examination   was sanctioned   and   through   the   medical   opinion   dated 20.09.2021   it   was   opined   that   the   respondent   is ‘asymptomatic’   and   he   is   not   on   any   medication   for ‘Hypertension’.   The   opinion   recorded   in   the   column, ‘diagnosis’   was   that   the   officer   is   upgraded   to   SHAPE­1. Though the medical opinion is to that effect, the learned ASG sought to dispute the same by referring to the observations contained   in   the   communication   dated   22.09.2021   stating that the opinion dated 20.09.2021 is not reliable since it was based on the statement of the respondent himself which was made to the doctor that he is not on any medication though the earlier records indicate that he was on medication.  13. Having   taken   note   of   the   contentions,   the   facts involved herein appear to be peculiar to the case on hand. 14 Firstly, as noted from regulation 67(b), an officer in SHAPE­2 also can be considered for promotion provided the Medical Board finds the officer to be capable of performing the normal active service duties. In the instant case, the respondent is the JAG officer and even if promoted would generally perform his duties in the headquarters. It cannot be disputed that as contended by the learned   ASG the services may require him to occasionally   go   to high altitude   areas.   In   that   regard,   a     consideration of the Medical Board opinion during April 2018 records   that   the   respondent   is   unfit   for   high   altitude employability  i.e.,   9000  feet and  above.  As   on  the   date  of consideration   by   No.1   Selection   Board,   undisputedly   the respondent was in SHAPE­2 medical condition. Apart from the fact that we have taken note of the observations of the AFT from the records of the selection process we have referred to the circular dated 06.05.1987 relating to selection process. It is noted that as per the composition of the Selection Board for the various ranks, it is indicated that No.1 Selection Board would   consider   the   cases   for   promotion   from   the   rank   of Brigadier to Major General which is relevant in the instant case and No.1 Selection Board consists of the cream of officers 15 in the Rank. In the guidelines for conduct of Selection Board, the aspects to be taken into consideration is delineated and provides   for   the   eligibility   of   the   officer   to   be   considered. Among   the   aspects   indicated   therein,   the   medical classification of the officer is one of the aspects. Further, while providing for objectivity in the selection process, apart from the overall performance of the officer, the employability of the officer in the next higher rank is to be kept in view by the Selection   Board.   The   regulations   while   providing   for   the consideration empowers the Chief of Army Staff to ultimately take a decision. The role of the Military Secretary is only to bring to the notice of the Chief of the Army Staff if the officer concerned   has   been   graded   against   the   guidelines   in   the board grading.  14. In the background of the above, even if the primary aspect of the respondent officer being classified as SHAPE­2 as on the date of consideration by the No.1 Selection Board and as on the date of declassification on 05.05.2021 to which detailed reference as made by the learned ASG is taken note of, as rightly observed by the AFT the medical records were available  before  the  No.1  Selection Board  and  a conscious 16 decision was taken to recommend for promotion. As noted, the guidelines provide for the Selection Board to take note of the medical classification of  the officer. That apart, for an objective selection, the guideline requires the Selection Board to keep in view the employability of the officer in the next higher  rank.   In  a  matter   of  the   present  nature   where   the selection was being made to a high rank from that of Brigadier to   Major   General   and   that   too   in   JAG   branch,   the employability of such officer and the nature of duties was also to be kept in view. In the instant case, the only disability of the officer concerned while in SHAPE­2 also is with regard to the risk in high altitude service and the No.1 Selection Board has kept in view the normal nature of work to be performed as JAG (Litigation). In that view, the No.1 Selection Board should be credited of having applied its mind before recommending the case of the respondent. Further, after clearance by the No.1   Selection   Board,   the   Chief   of   Defence   Staff   had   on 12.02.2021 taken note of the medical status of the respondent and had approved the recommendation. When officers of such high rank have applied their mind in the instant case and 17 approved the case of respondent for promotion the repeated objection by the Military Secretary is not justified.  15. The other aspect of the matter is that the respondent having filed an appeal and having made a request for waiver initially and thereafter for medical re­examination cannot be held against the respondent. Though the Selection Board had already   recommended   the   candidature   of   the   respondent which  had   been  approved   by  the   Chief  of   Army  Staff,   the respondent   had   sought   for   re­examination   which   is   to   his credit   and   was   rightly   allowed.   The   Medical   Board   in   the opinion dated 20.09.2021 (ANNEXURE A/10) has recorded as hereunder :­ “This   57   year   old   serving   officer   was   detected   to   have hypertension during AME in Apr 2018. He was evaluated and   diagnosed   to   have   Primary   Hypertension.   He   was advised   medication   BP   control   was   adequate. Subsequently   the   officer   has   discontinued   medicine for   last   one   year   as   recorded   by   AMS   and   BP   has remained   within   normal   limits   (Photocopy   of   BP recordings by AMA attached).   He is being observed in LMC   P2   (Permanent).   He   has   reported   for   remedial exam/Board as per directions of the COAS vide integrated HQ, MoD letter no. 76086/Gen/DGMS­5A dated 13 Sep. 2021.  He is presently asymptomatic. He is not on any medication for Hypertension. 3. DIAGNOSIS : Primary Hypertension  Opinion:   This   57   year   old   serving   officer   is   a   case   of primary hypertension.   He has adequate blood pressure control with life style modification for one year. BP 18 control   remains   adequate.   He   has   no   target   organ damage. In view of the above, the officer is a candidate   (as   per   DGAFMS for   upgradation   to   SHAPE­I memorandum No. 182 of 2012 Para 17 d)” (emphasis supplied) 16. As   noted,   the   learned   ASG   disputed   the   same   by referring   to   the   treatment   and   follow   up   booklet   which   is produced   along   with   the   additional   documents   by   the respondent himself to indicate that the observation recorded in the chart as, ­ ‘not on medication’ on various dates is based only on the oral statement of respondent made to the doctor which   cannot   be   given   credence.   On   this   aspect,   it   is necessary   to   note   that   the   medical   records   are   of   the ‘Command Hospital’ itself and not of a private practitioner. The first date on which it is recorded as, ­ ‘not on medication’ is on 25.06.2020   and the same is continued thereafter. The observations extracted above would indicate that the doctor has categorically recorded that the blood pressure has been controlled   with   lifestyle   modification   and   the   BP   control remains adequate. When the opinion has been tendered by the competent medical experts, merely because the Military Secretary is not satisfied with the same will not entail either 19 the AFT or this court to sit as a medical expert and reassess the opinion given by the Medical Board.  17. Be that as it may, when the No.1 Selection Board had taken note of the medical records as it existed earlier, in the background   of   nature   of   employability   of   the   respondent, which was approved by the Chief of Army Staff and further when   there   is   medical   record   to   indicate   that   the   medical condition of the respondent has improved for the better and the AFT while arriving at its conclusion has kept in view all aspects of the matter, such consideration would not call for interference.  18. The learned ASG further referred to the circular dated 07.09.2016, more particularly to para 3 thereof which read as hereunder:­ “3.   Post   declassification  of  Selection   Board  results   the empanelled officers are promoted in their turn based on availability of vacancies, performance & medical fitness. Given   the   time   lag   between   the   declassification   of Selection   Board   results   and   physical   promotion   of   an officer, there is a need to ensure that only 'those officers who are in acceptable medical category are promoted to the next  higher  rank.  The  actions  to be  taken  by   the officers and their Reporting chain on empanelment and during   physical   assumption   of   next   higher   rank   are enumerated in succeeding paragraphs.” In that regard, it is contended that given the time lag between declassification of the Selection Board results and the physical 20 promotion of an officer, it should be ensured that only those officers who are in acceptable medical category are promoted to the next higher rank. The said requirement also cannot act as a bar in the instant case, since as noted above, firstly there is an improvement   in   the   health   condition   and   the   respondent   is opined to be in SHAPE­1 by the Medical Board. Even otherwise as noted, the medical condition was kept in view by the No.1 Selection Board and all competent authorities, in the backdrop of   employability   and   there   is   no   other   additional   medical disability acquired by the respondent during the period of time lag, if any.  19. For   all   the   aforestated   reasons,   we   see   no   reason   to interfere with the order passed by the AFT impugned herein, which   shall   therefore   be   implemented   forthwith.   The   appeal being devoid of merit stands dismissed with no order as to costs.   All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.  20. …..…………....................J. (INDIRA BANERJEE) ..…..………......................J.       (A.S. BOPANNA) New Delhi, May 17,  2022 21