The committee had noted that the ego and prestige
based approach reflected how officers dealing with the subject were unable to
come to terms that cases had been decided against their stand
In a major move with far reaching consequences on
litigation involving soldiers and other defence employees, the Defence Minister
has accepted the recommendation of an expert panel wherein it was provided that
further appeals would not be filed by the Ministry of Defence on all subjects
which have attained finality at the High Courts or Supreme Court.
The Committee comprising former Adjutant General Lt
Gen Mukesh Sabharwal (retd), former Military Secretary Lt Gen Richard Khare
(retd), Punjab and Haryana High Court Lawyer Maj Navdeep Singh, former Judge
Advocate General (JAG) Maj Gen T Parshad and Kargil disabled veteran Maj DP
Singh had strongly deprecated the tendency of the Defence Ministry, long known
to be a chronic litigant, of filing individual appeals against court and
tribunal decisions in favour of employees on the pretext of the judgements
being ‘against government policy’.
Watch what else is in the newssh Assembly Elections
The committee had noted that an unexplained urge
was being shown by government officers to litigate who wanted to file multiple
cases even where the law had already been settled, with a hope that in some odd
stray case, a judgement would be rendered against an employee which could then
be flaunted to deny benefits to similarly placed employees.
The committee had noted that the ego and prestige
based approach reflected how officers dealing with the subject were unable to
come to terms that cases had been decided against their stand. The panel had
stated that there should be ‘quietus’ on issues which have attained finality at
the HC or SC.
Accepting the recommendation, the Defence Minister
is also learnt to have approved another related suggestion which additionally
covers civilian employees wherein noting that the effort of the system was to
wear down employees by filing multiple appeals, the panel had recommended that
the government should gracefully accept court verdicts as far as possible and
appeals should be an exception and not the rule.
Challenges of tribunal orders will be made in the
HC only in exceptional cases and appeals undertaken in the Supreme Court
restricted to the rarest of rare cases. The Committee had noted that the
culture of appealing must cease and officers should ‘concentrate upon improving
governance and administration rather than waging a litigative war against their
own junior employees who have limited means’.
In its strongly worded observations, the committee
had also noted that the official establishment was indulging in litigation of
‘luxury’ and that litigation should not be treated as a war or a sport which
must be won at all costs. The panel had expressed surprise that instead of
focussing on reducing appeals and faster implementation of orders as propounded
by the Defence Minister, certain officers had presented views during their
depositions on ways and means to file “faster appeals” which ran counter to the
very intentions of the government.
When contacted, Maj
Navdeep Singh, who was a member of the Committee, called it a “much needed
reform” but cautioned that the “political executive must ensure its
implementation in letter and spirit and must not allow the legal-official
ecosystem to hold political will to ransom”.
No comments:
Post a Comment