Inter Se Seniority and Suitability for the DGMS (Army) Post: A Detailed Examination of the Manomoy Ganguly Case

The case of Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly v. Union of India and Others revolves around the long-standing struggle of Lt. Gen. Ganguly to secure the position of Director General of Medical Services (Army) (DGMS). Despite his seniority and eligibility, the petitioner was bypassed in favor of another officer, leading to a series of legal battles. This case delves into the application of inter se seniority and suitability in the appointment process for high-ranking military positions. The central issue in this case is whether the principles of seniority and suitability, as laid down in the policy decision of 1992, were adhered to during the appointment process for DGMS (Army). The case also sheds light on the judicial review of the executive’s decision-making process in such appointments.

Background of the Case

Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly, after being denied promotion to the rank of Lieutenant General in 2016 by the Special Promotion Board (Medical), filed a legal challenge. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) ruled in his favor, stating that he was unfairly assigned fewer marks than his counterparts, which resulted in his denial of promotion. The Supreme Court upheld this decision in 2017, directing the government to promote him. In 2018, after the promotion was granted, Lt. Gen. Ganguly aspired to the position of DGMS (Army), for which he was eligible and the senior-most officer in the feeder rank.

However, the appointment process for DGMS (Army) saw the promotion of Air Marshal Rajvir Singh, despite the fact that Lt. Gen. Ganguly was senior to him. This led to another round of litigation, where the petitioner challenged the appointment, arguing that his seniority and suitability were overlooked.

Key Legal Issues

• Whether the criteria of ‘inter se seniority and suitability’ for the appointment of DGMS (Army) were correctly applied in this case.
• Whether Air Marshal Rajvir Singh’s lateral transfer from the Air Force to the Army violated the policy guidelines of 1992, which allow such transfers only in exceptional circumstances.
• Whether the decision-making process followed by the authorities in appointing Air Marshal Rajvir Singh was fair and objective, considering the criteria of seniority and suitability.
• Whether the petitioner’s rights were violated by the appointment process, given his seniority and previous experience.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner, Lt. Gen. Ganguly, argued that he was unjustly denied the position of DGMS (Army) despite being the senior-most officer. He presented the following arguments:

• Lt. Gen. Ganguly was the senior-most eligible officer for the post of DGMS (Army), as per the 1992 policy guidelines, which have always followed seniority as a decisive factor.
• Air Marshal Rajvir Singh, who was appointed as DGMS (Army), was not only junior in rank but had also been transferred from the Air Force to the Army, which violated the 1992 guidelines that allow lateral transfers only in exceptional circumstances.
• The petitioner’s suitability for the post was unquestionable, given his extensive administrative and operational experience, whereas Air Marshal Rajvir Singh was not as well-qualified in terms of medical specialization and administrative roles.
• Despite his promotion and eligibility for the post, he was bypassed without proper justification, which he argued amounted to a deliberate attempt to exclude him from the position.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Union of India, represented by the Attorney General, countered the petitioner’s claims by asserting that the appointment process followed the guidelines and was based on a thorough assessment of both seniority and suitability. The key points of their defense included:

• The decision to appoint Air Marshal Rajvir Singh was made after a fair evaluation of his suitability based on his experience, skill, and attributes, in accordance with the criteria set out in the 1992 policy.
• While seniority is an important factor, the selection process also required the assessment of suitability, including attributes such as competence, administrative experience, and overall performance. This was done using the Overall Average Performance (OAP) approach, which the court had earlier endorsed in its ruling.
• The lateral transfer of Air Marshal Rajvir Singh was justified due to his significant experience and the exigencies of administration, especially given his high performance as DGMS (Air).
• It was not appropriate for the petitioner to claim the position based solely on seniority, as the government needed to ensure the appointment of the most suitable candidate to serve the interests of the Army Medical Corps and the Armed Forces Medical Services (AFMS) as a whole.

The Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court, after carefully examining the arguments from both sides, addressed the central issue of whether the appointment process for DGMS (Army) adhered to the established criteria of inter se seniority and suitability. The Court made the following observations:

“The expression ‘inter se’ applies to both seniority and suitability. Therefore, while seniority does provide a precedence, suitability must also be evaluated with respect to the attributes, experience, and competence of the officers involved.”

Furthermore, the Court noted:

“The Government’s decision-making process, in this case, did not strictly follow the criteria laid down in the 1992 policy. The lateral shifting of Air Marshal Rajvir Singh was done without providing any exceptional circumstances, which the guidelines require.”

The Court also observed that while seniority was an important factor, suitability based on overall performance and qualifications should not have been ignored. The Court concluded that the criteria for appointing DGMS (Army) required a balance between seniority and suitability, with seniority being the primary consideration if the candidate was fit for the position.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court quashed the appointment of Air Marshal Rajvir Singh as DGMS (Army), stating that the decision-making process did not comply with the proper legal framework. The Court directed the respondents to appoint Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly to the position, as he was the senior-most officer and met the suitability requirements for the post.

Key Points from the Judgment:

• The process of appointing DGMS (Army) must follow the criteria of ‘inter se seniority and suitability’, where seniority plays a primary role but is evaluated alongside suitability.
• Lateral transfers from other services to DGMS (Army) are permissible only in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case.
• The appointment of Air Marshal Rajvir Singh was deemed inconsistent with the established guidelines, as no exceptional circumstances were provided to justify the lateral shift.
• The appointment process was not conducted with due fairness, leading to the quashing of the appointment of Air Marshal Rajvir Singh and the directive to appoint Lt. Gen. Ganguly.

Petitioner Name: Lt. Gen. Manomoy Ganguly.
Respondent Name: Union of India.
Judgment By: Justice A.K. Sikri, Justice Ashok Bhushan.
Place Of Incident: New Delhi.
Judgment Date: 29-10-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Lt. Gen. Manomoy Gan vs Union of India Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 29-10-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Promotion Cases
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Recruitment Policies
See all petitions in Judgment by A.K. Sikri
See all petitions in Judgment by Ashok Bhushan
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments October 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category