VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2020 › High Court of Delhi

Dhruv Jakhar v. Uinion of India Ors & Ors

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
29 September 2020
Bench
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Asha Menonauthor
Case no.
W.P.(C) 5622/2020

Judgment

ASHA MENON, J.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. SEPTEMBER 29, 2020 S*

Case details

Parties and counsel

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29th September, 2020 + DHRUV JAKHAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Karan Dewan and Ms. Aanchal Jain, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, CGSr.C with Mr. Sameer Sinha, GP with Major Katoch, Legal Cell CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING] JUSTICE ASHA MENON W.P.(C) 5622/2020 & CM APPL. 20364/2020 (for interim stay) 1. The petitioner is a young aspirant to the Indian Army and has filed this petition with the following prayers: "(i) Writ order in the Nature of Certiorari to quash and set aside the withdrawal letter dated 16.01.2020 and/or (ii) Writ order in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to take back the Petitioner in the training at the IMA for clearing of the remaining three PT tests and that on qualifying the same, be restored to the original seniority of the 145 Regular Course at par with his Coursemates with all the Consequential Reliefs ....." 2. The facts as are relevant for the disposal of the present petition are as follows. After clearing the Combined Defence Services (CDS) Examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and the interview conducted by the Service Selection Board (SSB), including medical fitness, the petitioner joined the Indian Military Academy (IMA) on 8th July, 2017 for his Pre-Commissioning Training to join the Indian Army as a Commissioned Officer. But it appears that his stay has not been very happy, as is evident from the averments. The petitioner was subjected to ragging and was admitted to the hospital from 17th July, 2017 to 26th July, 2017. On 27th July, 2017, he also filed a complaint against the ragging and the inhuman treatment that he had been subjected to by his seniors. 3. This seems to have been a harbinger for things to follow. Even as per the petitioner, he was subjected to punishments for various infractions, right from the First Term of six months. In routine, the petitioner should have passed out after completing his course as a Commissioned Officer in a year and a half, by the end of 2018. He did complete his First Term successfully and was promoted to the Second Term along with his batch-mates in the 143rd Regular Course IMA. However, a week before the Second Term came to an end in May 2018, the petitioner was served with a Notice to Show Cause as to why he should not be 'Relegated' for having accumulated 60 Restrictions in two terms from 8th July, 2017 to 30th May, 2018. Despite his reply, the petitioner was 'Relegated' and completed his Second Term after repeating it, with the 144th Regular Course IMA. 4. According to the petitioner, without losing heart or motivation, he focused on his training and was promoted to the Final/Third Term on 7th January, 2019. However, on 7th March, 2019, the petitioner was served with another Show-Cause Notice asking him to explain as to why he should not be 'Relegated' to a batch junior for having accumulated 65 Restrictions in two consecutive terms. Despite his request for a fortnight's time to reply, and the supply of copies of the Administrative Instructions of HQ ARTRAC and other documents, he was not provided the time nor the documents. Rather, in an arbitrary manner, the Commandant IMA relegated the petitioner from the 144th Regular Course IMA to the 145th Regular Course IMA. 5. Though the petitioner claimed that he had been unjustly punished and that the punishments were absolutely disproportionate to the alleged offences and were illegal and were imposed against the principles of natural justice and in violation of the Policy issued by HQ ARTRAC, he once again commenced his training in his Final Term on 8th July, 2019 in Zojila Coy Manekshaw Battalion. According to the petitioner, despite his sincere and best efforts, he was unnecessarily targeted and singled out by his Company Commander (Coy Cdr). Due to the negativity of the Coy

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.