LT. GEN. MANOMOY GANGULY, VSM versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

LT. GEN. MANOMOY GANGULY, VSM versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

The process of considering and appointing respondent no. 4 as DGMS (Army) violated the Government’s policy—lateral shifting was permitted only in exceptional circumstances, which were neither asserted nor established. The criteria of 'inter se seniority and suitability' were misconstrued by employing OAP (Overall Average Performance) as a method, which is alien to the guidelines and past practice. The petitioner, being the senior most eligible and not found unsuitable, was entitled to preference. Therefore, the appointment of respondent no. 4 was set aside and a mandamus issued to appoint the petitioner.

Parties
Petitioner: Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly, VSM; Respondents: Union of India and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) Under Article 32 / Final Decision on Writ Petition
Outcome
Writ petition allowed; appointment of respondent no. 4 as DGMS (Army) set aside; mandamus issued to appoint petitioner as DGMS (Army).
Legal Topics
Promotion in Armed Forces, Appointment to DGMS (army), Application of Government Guidelines, Seniority and Suitability Criteria, Judicial Review of Administrative Action
Constitutional Law Service Law Administrative Law Armed Forces Law Promotion in Armed Forces Appointment to DGMS (army) Application of Government Guidelines Seniority and Suitability Criteria +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly, VSM

Petitioner

Union of India and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) Under Article 32 / Final Decision on Writ Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment to the post of DGMS (Army) was in violation of the Government of India's Guidelines dated July 10, 1992;
  2. 2 Whether lateral shifting and consideration of a DGMS (Air) for DGMS (Army) without exceptional circumstances was permissible;
  3. 3 Whether the criteria of 'inter se seniority' and 'suitability' was correctly applied as per the policy and judicial directions;

Ratio Decidendi

The process of considering and appointing respondent no. 4 as DGMS (Army) violated the Government’s policy—lateral shifting was permitted only in exceptional circumstances, which were neither asserted nor established. The criteria of 'inter se seniority and suitability' were misconstrued by employing OAP (Overall Average Performance) as a method, which is alien to the guidelines and past practice. The petitioner, being the senior most eligible and not found unsuitable, was entitled to preference. Therefore, the appointment of respondent no. 4 was set aside and a mandamus issued to appoint the petitioner.

Court Disposition

Writ petition allowed; appointment of respondent no. 4 as DGMS (Army) set aside; mandamus issued to appoint petitioner as DGMS (Army).

Orders

  • Appointment of respondent no. 4 (Air Marshal Rajvir Singh) as DGMS (Army) is set aside.
  • Respondents directed to appoint the petitioner, Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly, as DGMS (Army) within one week.