Q: Elaborate the citation of Sqn.Ldr. (Retd). Navtej Singh vs Union Of India . on 5 December, 2018 ?

Ans: 

Sqn.Ldr. (Retd). Navtej Singh vs Union Of India . on 5 December, 2018.

Appellant after completing training from Air Force Academy, Hyderabad, was granted commission in rank of Pilot Officer in branch of Flying Navigation of Indian Air Force with effect from 16th December, 1995. Thereafter, he received promotions in due course of time and was finally promoted to rank of Squadron Leader. Sometime in year 2001, Appellant was diagnosed of Dysmia and Alcohol Dependence Syndrome and Primary Hypothyroidism and since n was put in low medical category. A Medical Board was constituted to consider his medical condition and Medical Board found him to be unfit for all flying duties. Appellant was given option of being transferred to Administrative Branch but expressed his unwillingness. In circumstances, Invaliding Medical Board was constituted to consider case which declared that, Appellant be invalidated out of service on medical grounds. Aforesaid recommendation of Invaliding Medical Board was approved and Appellant was invalidated out of service with effect from 18th November, 2009 in rank of Squadron Leader. While in service, on 27th October, 2008 Appellant had applied to Director, Directorate of IMINT, Air Headquarters (VB), New Delhi, seeking permission to marry. Tribunal did not accept case that, medical condition of Appellant was attributable to or was aggravated by conditions of service. It however held that, Appellant had 30% disability which was to be rounded off to 50% and consequently

was entitled to disability pension @ 50% with interest @ 12% per annum. It however rejected case that, Appellant was entitled to promotion as claimed. It was also held that since marriage was contracted by Appellant without any permission, he was not entitled to take benefit of his marriage with foreign national. Tribunal thus partly allowed O.A. No. 420/2013. Appellant thereafter filed Review Application No. 19/2015 seeking review on grounds that Appellant had applied for ex-post facto sanction of marriage on 15.01.2009 which was duly recommended by Section Commander and Air Officer Commanding. It was further stated that, in terms of AFO 14/2000, Respondents had to process application within 120 days and as there was complete failure on their part, in terms of said AFO, there would be deemed consent. This review application was dismissed by Tribunal 5. Aforesaid judgment and orders were under challenge in this appeal. Appellant had challenged order invalidating him from service on medical grounds and had prayed for directions that he be promoted to post of Wing Commander and that names of his family members (wife and daughter) be recorded in service record and allow all benefits due to them.

Thr honourable Supreme Court held, while allowing the appeal:

1. It was a common ground that in terms of relevant policy, a serving officer would be required to obtain permission before any marriage with a foreign national could be contracted. On 27th August, 2008 Appellant applied to Directorate seeking permission to marry. According to relevant policy, document marriage could not be contracted without requisite permission to marry and in case no communication was received from Directorate for 120 days, there would be deemed consent and permission. Appellant without waiting for express permission or expiry of 120 days, did contract marriage on 19th December, 2008. Any violation on part of officer of mandate concerned policy could visit him with possibility of departmental action including dismissal or removal from service. 

2. In present case, neither there was any action taken against Appellant for infraction of mandatory requirement of policy nor re was any express communication rejecting his request seeking permission. As a matter of fact, there was no communication at all within 120 days.

3. After having contracted marriage, Appellant also applied for ex-post facto permission for marriage. However, said application was not considered at all as, in meantime, Appellant was released from Indian Air Force and ceased to be governed by provisions of Indian Air Force Act, as asserted in counter affidavit. 

4. Underlying idea behind policy was that, in case a person governed by provisions of Indian Air Force Act, 1950 intended to contract marriage with a foreign national, requisite intimation in that behalf was required to be made and appropriate permission was also required to be obtained. As a part of exercise, foreign national with whom marriage was to be contracted may be required to give up original citizenship and acquire citizenship of India. If there be any infraction or violation of mandate of requirements, concerned officer could be visited with penalty including dismissal or removal from service. Policy had well laid and designed procedure including timelines and time limit of 120 days within which authorities were required to apply their mind and consider application seeking permission. In case nothing was heard within 120 days, policy incorporates concept of deemed consent or permission. 

5. Initial application was dated 27th October, 2008 and he was invalidated out of service with effect from 18th November, 2009 on medical grounds and not for any infraction of aforesaid policy. As a matter of fat department did not respond for more than 120 days in matter.

6. Policy in question was aimed at regulating certain aspects while officers were in service. If an officer after his release or retirement could, therefore, validly contract marriage with a foreign national and spouse would therefore be entitled to all benefits including medical or hospital facilities or club membership or canteen facilities etc., it did not stand to reason why Appellant, at least after his release from Indian Air Force, should be disentitled in that behalf. 

7. In facts and circumstances of case, Respondents were directed to include names of wife and daughter of Appellant in Service Certificate at least from date of his release or retirement and direct Respondents to extend to wife and daughter of Appellant all such benefits which a spouse and children of a retired officer would be entitled.