The regional Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), in a recent verdict, directed the authorities to detail a serving sailor, who had earlier been punished under the Navy Act for indulging in malpractices in an examination, for a course whose successful completion would qualify him to be commissioned as a Special Duty (SD) List officer.
M. Sanjay, currently serving as sailor in the Naval Aircraft Yard (Kochi), was punished by the Navy in 2005 with stoppage of leave for 60 days and a reprimand for allegedly colluding with a faculty member to obtain details of the question paper in advance while he was undergoing the SD (AE) ‘Q' course at the Naval Institute of Aeronautical Technology (NIAT) at the Southern Naval Command. The Navy also initiated administrative action by debarring him from two subsequent SD (AE) ‘Q' courses.
In 2006, while Mr. Sanjay was serving on board the aircraft carrier INS Viraat, the Commodore Bureau of Sailors (CABS) asked the Commanding Officer of Viraat to transfer him to NIAT to undergo the course, but the nomination was cancelled by CABS itself through another communication.
The Navy, citing the Navy Act and the Regulations of the Navy, maintained that the sailor was not entitled to another chance to attend the course and that his candidature for SD (AE) ‘Q' course was permanently struck off from SD (List) in accordance with the rules. The AFT, which examined if the sailor could be permanently debarred from the course, observed that permanent disqualification of the sailor from attending the course would amount to punishing him twice for the same offence.
‘Unacceptable'
The Bench agreed with the Navy that the malpractice reflected poorly on the ‘Officer Like Qualities' (OLQ) — integrity and moral character — of the candidate and went on to assert that this was ‘unacceptable' for any ranks. It, however, expressed surprise that malpractice is only given a ‘mild' punishment in the Navy.
