Never miss a great news story!
Get instant notifications from Economic Times
AllowNot now


You can switch off notifications anytime using browser settings.

Politics and Nation

Oct 11, 2017, 04.56 AM IST
LATEST NEWS

    Portfolio

    Loading...
    Select Portfolio and Asset Combination for Display on Market Band
    Select Portfolio
    Select Asset Class
    Show More
    Download ET MARKETS APP

    Get ET Markets in your own language

    DOWNLOAD THE APP NOW

    +91

    CHOOSE LANGUAGE

    ENG

    • ENG - English
    • HIN - हिन्दी
    • GUJ - ગુજરાતી
    • MAR - मराठी
    • BEN - বাংলা
    • KAN - ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ORI - ଓଡିଆ
    • TEL - తెలుగు
    • TAM - தமிழ்
    Drag according to your convenience
    ET NOW RADIO
    ET NOW
    TIMES NOW

    Supreme Court seeks Centre's reply on Armyman's plea against his posting

    PTI|
    Updated: Oct 10, 2017, 05.24 PM IST
    0Comments
    He contended that Army could not be permitted to take a dual stand -- treating an ASC officer as 'operational' for postings, but branding him 'non-operational' for promotion.
    He contended that Army could not be permitted to take a dual stand -- treating an ASC officer as 'operational' for postings, but branding him 'non-operational' for promotion.

    NEW DELHI: A jawan's plea claiming he should not be posted in operational areas to fight the enemy if he has been classified as a non-combatant, has prompted the Supreme Court to seek the government's response.

    A bench of Justices R F Nariman and S K Kaul issued notice to the Centre and sought its reply in four weeks on the petition of Army Service Corps (ASC) Major Amod Kumar against his posting to counter-insurgency unit Rashtriya Rifles, a combat unit, when the Army considered him a non-combatant for promotion purpose.

    He contended that Army could not be permitted to take a dual stand -- treating an ASC officer as 'operational' for postings, but branding him 'non-operational' for promotion.

    His petition said "Services officers are routinely deployed in operational areas despite the Army authorities holding them to be 'non-operational'. The petitioner cannot be compelled to serve in an operational area and to do so is in violation of his fundamental right and principles of natural justice."
    0Comments

    Also Read

    Supreme Court allows buyers to intervene in Jaypee case

    Supreme Court raps lawyers for boycott of Ryan accused

    Rohingyas are national security threat: Government in Supreme Court

    Trump administration appeals to Supreme Court on refugee ban

    Trump administration appeals to Supreme Court on refugee ban

    Comments
    Add Your Comments

    Loading
    Please wait...