Rahul Singh, Hindustan Times New Delhi, April 21, 2011
The defence ministry on Wednesday called for all documents related to army chief Gen VK Singh's date of birth (DoB) to settle the controversy over the two conflicting dates recorded in Singh's dossiers. "The records have been sought for scrutiny," said a source. The issue began in May 2006 when t he military secretary's branch detected two different DoBs for Singh in its official records.
The army chief had been maintaining his DoB as May 10, 1951 in his confidential reports and service record - contrary to the DoB shown in other official documents.
HT had on Wednesday reported how Singh made an unconditional commitment in 2008, accepting May 10, 1950 as his birth date. The matter was referred to the law ministry for its opinion.
The legal opinion accepted Singh's birth date as May 10, 1951 on the basis of his high school certificate.
If the defence ministry accepts the law ministry's opinion, Singh will retire in March 2013 instead of May 2012, giving him 10 more months as army chief.
Army chief's age: Defence ministry asks for documents
Comment
Now that the Law Ministry has accepted 1951 as the year of birth of the Chief, one is keen to know how the data in the MS records came to be different. There is an insinuation in the report that it happened during Gen Awadesh Prakash's time. Whether it be true or not it is a matter that should be investigated.
P M Ravindran
Showing posts with label MS Branch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MS Branch. Show all posts
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Selecting Military Top Brass- Readers Responses
Ref: Selecting Military Top Brass
I am dismayed to see an intellectually flawed and misinformed article from someone of Gen Suman's calibre.
His assumptions that promotions to the top echelons, viz Army Cdrs and the Chief are on 'auto pilot', non-merit based and manipulated to promote mediocrity, are not well founded.
It is natural that the System would have 'evolved' since I retired, many years ago, yet it cannot have regressed to such cynical depths. Indian Military has sound and resilient institutions. Let us not 'knock' them so lightly.
Some facts, as known( first hand, even if dated):-
Empanelment of Lt Gens and selection of Chiefs is based on a multi-level selection process involving Service HQ/MOD/ACC. The independent scrutiny for suitability and comparison of merit is rigorous and longitudnal ( bureaucracies have long institutional memories)- not at all a nominal/automatic process. Differences in perceptions/ judgments do abound and discussions are commonplace-last word has to rest with the GOI. It is definitely not with the perverse and parochial Chiefs,as implied.
Some illustrations of (eligible by DOB) Lt Gens/ Corps Cdrs who sadly got left out are Gens Sinha, M Thomas, Balaram, ML Tuli, Hanut Singh, Mike Lahiri, Guru Bakshi, Kadyan etc. Hopefully this debunks the 'auto-pilot' myth. Incidentally, all the above in my view were thoroughly deserving. But then 'systems' are introduced to moderate personal subjectivity/ halo-and they are fallible.
I am not an apologist for (the perfection of) the system nor anti-reform but to let 'injury to institutions' pass would be unworthy. By all means 'tweak' the system constructively; but to 'subvert' it thus is in no one's interest.
One of the great strengths of the Indian Military has been its faith- in itself and its Institutions- despite the inequities and perceived injustices (those are a part of the natural order). Of late, the liberating technology and culture, is lifting some of the discretion and maturity that enabled us express with dignity and also keep that 'faith'. I do hope that in this new- found and growing exuberance/ cynicism/ intemperance, we the Veterans do not hurt the nobility and grace of our Ethos.
Yogi Sharma
Lt Gen YN Sharma, Former Army Commander
An excellent, balanced and a well analysed article. I hope the three Services will look into the very significant points mentioned and rationalise the selections beyond the level of the Corps Cdrs too. Incidentally the Army follows the rule of min 2 years residual service for Corps Cdrs becoming Army Cdrs whereas the IAF and Navy follow only one year residual service. Thus what is happening is that in the large number of Inter service appts many Army offrs perforce get toserve under the IN and IAF offrs who were originally junior to them.Also the Supreme Court on many occasions have advised the Services HQs to streamline thier promotion policies for senior offrs. I am afraid some among the top hierarchy have not been fair to the Service they have the privilege to lead and thus' mediocrity with agreeability' reinforced by an unwarranted regimental loyalty becomes the major criteria for movement upwards and has brought a bad name to the Services. I pray for the best to lead the best in the service of the country. JAI HIND,
Lt Gen Kamal Davar (Retd)
I am dismayed to see an intellectually flawed and misinformed article from someone of Gen Suman's calibre.
His assumptions that promotions to the top echelons, viz Army Cdrs and the Chief are on 'auto pilot', non-merit based and manipulated to promote mediocrity, are not well founded.
It is natural that the System would have 'evolved' since I retired, many years ago, yet it cannot have regressed to such cynical depths. Indian Military has sound and resilient institutions. Let us not 'knock' them so lightly.
Some facts, as known( first hand, even if dated):-
I am not an apologist for (the perfection of) the system nor anti-reform but to let 'injury to institutions' pass would be unworthy. By all means 'tweak' the system constructively; but to 'subvert' it thus is in no one's interest.
One of the great strengths of the Indian Military has been its faith- in itself and its Institutions- despite the inequities and perceived injustices (those are a part of the natural order). Of late, the liberating technology and culture, is lifting some of the discretion and maturity that enabled us express with dignity and also keep that 'faith'. I do hope that in this new- found and growing exuberance/ cynicism/ intemperance, we the Veterans do not hurt the nobility and grace of our Ethos.
Yogi Sharma
Lt Gen YN Sharma, Former Army Commander
An excellent, balanced and a well analysed article. I hope the three Services will look into the very significant points mentioned and rationalise the selections beyond the level of the Corps Cdrs too. Incidentally the Army follows the rule of min 2 years residual service for Corps Cdrs becoming Army Cdrs whereas the IAF and Navy follow only one year residual service. Thus what is happening is that in the large number of Inter service appts many Army offrs perforce get toserve under the IN and IAF offrs who were originally junior to them.Also the Supreme Court on many occasions have advised the Services HQs to streamline thier promotion policies for senior offrs. I am afraid some among the top hierarchy have not been fair to the Service they have the privilege to lead and thus' mediocrity with agreeability' reinforced by an unwarranted regimental loyalty becomes the major criteria for movement upwards and has brought a bad name to the Services. I pray for the best to lead the best in the service of the country. JAI HIND,
Lt Gen Kamal Davar (Retd)
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Military Secretary's ACR system breeding Black Sheep?
One would hate to be in the shoes of the Chief of Army Staff these days. Having to wake up every morning dreading what bombshell the newspapers would bring can’t be a pleasant experience. Being at the helm of an organisation consisting of over 10, 00,000 bodies in this age of scandal hungry public and an ever obliging media, this is a cross that he perhaps has to bear. The sad part is that the antics of a few black sheep with unbridled libido, greed or ambition inevitably overshadow the sterling work done by the other 99.9% comprising the organisation. The latest scandal screaming at us from the headlines and ubiquitous red ticker tapes of breaking news is yet another such incident.
There is a need to drastically cut down on all non-core activities that serve not only to detract efforts from professional pursuits but also provide opportunities for career advancement to those thriving on these.
Training events must reflect this professionalism and should be shorn of attempts at showmanship, and consequent assessments must also be on professional basis. In fact, the need for a revamp of the entire assessment system has been talked about for long but there have been only cosmetic changes limited by the stifled imagination of the MS Branch. For a comprehensive reform of the appraisal system, there is a need to throw out the old rule book and take a fresh look at the entire game. The reporting officers up the chain of command must be made to exercise their moral courage by being less non-committal about their assessments. We need to change the environment where an overwhelming majority of the reports are like a ‘dining out speech’. The reporting must be less generic, and unequivocal. For instance, how can attributes like loyalty and integrity be rated on an analog scale? Logically, these are qualities that are either present or absent in the absolute, and half measures or shades of grey are not possible. Also, the reviewing officers up the chain need to make greater efforts to familiarize themselves with their indirect reports, and must also be made accountable for their assessments. To make the appraisal system truly meaningful, a 360 degrees appraisal must be put in place.
Courtesy Swordarm Blog: Click link to read more including valuable comments
Baa Baa Black Sheep
There is a need to drastically cut down on all non-core activities that serve not only to detract efforts from professional pursuits but also provide opportunities for career advancement to those thriving on these.
Training events must reflect this professionalism and should be shorn of attempts at showmanship, and consequent assessments must also be on professional basis. In fact, the need for a revamp of the entire assessment system has been talked about for long but there have been only cosmetic changes limited by the stifled imagination of the MS Branch. For a comprehensive reform of the appraisal system, there is a need to throw out the old rule book and take a fresh look at the entire game. The reporting officers up the chain of command must be made to exercise their moral courage by being less non-committal about their assessments. We need to change the environment where an overwhelming majority of the reports are like a ‘dining out speech’. The reporting must be less generic, and unequivocal. For instance, how can attributes like loyalty and integrity be rated on an analog scale? Logically, these are qualities that are either present or absent in the absolute, and half measures or shades of grey are not possible. Also, the reviewing officers up the chain need to make greater efforts to familiarize themselves with their indirect reports, and must also be made accountable for their assessments. To make the appraisal system truly meaningful, a 360 degrees appraisal must be put in place.
Courtesy Swordarm Blog: Click link to read more including valuable comments
Baa Baa Black Sheep
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Maj Gen promoted 15 years after retirement
New Delhi, Mar 7 (PTI)
A Major General, who retired 15 years ago, has been granted promotion to the rank of Lt Gen by the Armed Forces Tribunal here. After the Tribunal order, Maj Gen Devendra Nath Verma, a former Signals officer who retired on September 30, 1995, will notionally become a Lt Gen and would be given all the pension. Since the petitioner has retired, he may be granted notional promotion to that of a Lt Gen with effect from October 1, 1995 and the financial consequences that would have accrued to him had he been in service, including that of pensionary benefits, a two-member Bench headed by Tribunal Chair person Justice A K Mathur said in its order.
Demanding quashing of his retirement, Verma, who is in his early 70s, had petitioned that service extension of three months given to another officer, Lt Gen P D Bhargava (Retd), was stage-managed, which denied him the opportunity for promotion to the rank of Lt Gen.
Verma also contended that the three-month extension given to Bhargava was not recommended by the Army but was granted suo motu by the Defence Ministry. Agreeing with Verma's contention, the Tribunal said the granting of extension to Bhargava was "totally unjustified and ultra-vires".
The Tribunal said even a one day extension to Verma would have ensured retired Maj Gen’s promotion on October 1, 1995.Pointing out that the treatment meted out by the Army to Verma was "malafide and unfair", Justice Mathur said the extension granted to Bhargava had set forth a chain of events, which denied promotion to Verma, who was "otherwise fully eligible to become a Lt Gen in his own Corps".
"The extension enabled Bhargava to stay in service despite reaching the age of superannuation on January 31, 1994 and subsequently pick up his rank of Lt Gen on April 1, 1994, and finally side step as Signal Officer-in-Chief on February 1, 1995," it said.
The Tribunal, however, didn’t take any action against the extension of service granted to Bhargava as Verma had not sought it in his petition and has given 90 days to the Army to complete the exercise.
After his retirement, Verma had filed the case in the Delhi high Court and the petition was recently transferred to the Tribunal. sionary and financial benefits attached with the promotion.
Maj Gen promoted 15 years after retirement
A Major General, who retired 15 years ago, has been granted promotion to the rank of Lt Gen by the Armed Forces Tribunal here. After the Tribunal order, Maj Gen Devendra Nath Verma, a former Signals officer who retired on September 30, 1995, will notionally become a Lt Gen and would be given all the pension. Since the petitioner has retired, he may be granted notional promotion to that of a Lt Gen with effect from October 1, 1995 and the financial consequences that would have accrued to him had he been in service, including that of pensionary benefits, a two-member Bench headed by Tribunal Chair person Justice A K Mathur said in its order.
Demanding quashing of his retirement, Verma, who is in his early 70s, had petitioned that service extension of three months given to another officer, Lt Gen P D Bhargava (Retd), was stage-managed, which denied him the opportunity for promotion to the rank of Lt Gen.
Verma also contended that the three-month extension given to Bhargava was not recommended by the Army but was granted suo motu by the Defence Ministry. Agreeing with Verma's contention, the Tribunal said the granting of extension to Bhargava was "totally unjustified and ultra-vires".
The Tribunal said even a one day extension to Verma would have ensured retired Maj Gen’s promotion on October 1, 1995.Pointing out that the treatment meted out by the Army to Verma was "malafide and unfair", Justice Mathur said the extension granted to Bhargava had set forth a chain of events, which denied promotion to Verma, who was "otherwise fully eligible to become a Lt Gen in his own Corps".
"The extension enabled Bhargava to stay in service despite reaching the age of superannuation on January 31, 1994 and subsequently pick up his rank of Lt Gen on April 1, 1994, and finally side step as Signal Officer-in-Chief on February 1, 1995," it said.
The Tribunal, however, didn’t take any action against the extension of service granted to Bhargava as Verma had not sought it in his petition and has given 90 days to the Army to complete the exercise.
After his retirement, Verma had filed the case in the Delhi high Court and the petition was recently transferred to the Tribunal. sionary and financial benefits attached with the promotion.
Maj Gen promoted 15 years after retirement
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Land Scam: Fued at the top
Feud at the top in army- Gen Kapoor versus Lt Gen Singh
GEN DEEPAK KAPOOR The army chief has told the defence minister that Lt Gen. V.K. Singh, who heads the Eastern Command, has taken an “undue interest” in a north Bengal land case involving Kapoor’s principal staff officer and military secretary Lt Gen. Avadhesh Prakash. Kapoor has resisted a recommendation to terminate Prakash’s service before his January-end retirement
A.K. ANTONY The defence minister, who zealously guards his Mr Clean reputation, summoned the army chief on Christmas Eve and wanted Lt Gen. Prakash to be eased out. Gen. Kapoor demurred and defended his aide but Antony was not convinced. A source said the minister ‘cold-shouldered’ the army chief the next day when Gen. Kapoor met him to convey his Christmas greetings.
LT GEN VK SINGH The Fort William boss had convened a court of inquiry that indicted Lt Gen Prakash in the land case. Gen Kapoor feels the eastern commander does not have the authority to summon the army chief’s principal staff officer. Lt Gen VK Singh, whose age is caught in a discrepancy, was bypassed earlier for the post of vice-chief.
Read more
Feud at the top in army- Gen Kapoor versus Lt Gen Singh
Top post caught in age
While this is at its nuts and bolts a narrative on corruption in the military and politics over promotions, it is above all indicative of a serious communication gap between army headquarters and the Eastern Command, a fully operational authority whose area of responsibility covers the maximum length of international borders (with China, Bhutan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Myanmar). Its components are also actively involved in counter-insurgency.
Top post caught in age: The Telegraph
Read more
Feud at the top in army- Gen Kapoor versus Lt Gen Singh
Top post caught in age
While this is at its nuts and bolts a narrative on corruption in the military and politics over promotions, it is above all indicative of a serious communication gap between army headquarters and the Eastern Command, a fully operational authority whose area of responsibility covers the maximum length of international borders (with China, Bhutan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Myanmar). Its components are also actively involved in counter-insurgency.
Top post caught in age: The Telegraph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
