The Delhi High Court recently mandated the Indian Army to reassess a retired Major General for promotion to the rank of Lieutenant General. This decision came following the officer’s prior denial of promotion, which was based on a reprimand related to the loss of sensitive information from his laptop.
In its ruling, a bench comprised of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur instructed that Major General H. Dharmarajan, who retired on January 31, 2024, should be considered for a notional promotion to Lieutenant General. The court specified that if Maj Gen Dharmarajan is deemed worthy of this promotion, the Army must grant it along with corresponding benefits, including a revision of his pension based on notional seniority, though without any arrears of pay.
The bench identified that during the promotion evaluation, the Army Special Selection Board (SSB) had improperly taken into account a reprimand issued to Maj Gen Dharmarajan, observing that it should not have been referenced in the decision-making process. According to the court, the reprimand, not meant to be included, should not have influenced the Board in its assessment. The conclusion drawn by the bench highlighted that denying promotion based solely on this reprimand was neither justified nor fair.
Maj Gen Dharmarajan, who was commissioned in December 1986, had commanded the 25 Infantry Division in Jammu and Kashmir from December 2018. He was slated for promotion consideration in June 2020. However, in July 2019, he was issued a show-cause notice citing a breach of the Cyber Security Policy due to actions taken on his official laptop, including a failure to switch to the mandated Bharat Operating System Solutions (BOSS). The notice detailed an incident in which he clicked on a phishing email, resulting in malware installation and a subsequent loss of classified data.
Upon reviewing Maj Gen Dharmarajan’s response, the relevant authority determined that he was culpable for minor procedural lapses but cleared him of more serious allegations. Consequently, he received a reprimand in September 2019.
The High Court elucidated that a reprimand serves as a disciplinary measure for minor misconduct and is not meant to be recorded in an officer’s service records. The justices noted that the intent behind a reprimand is to signal areas for improvement without necessitating further inquiry, indicating that it reflects a relatively benign form of correction.
In its assessment of the selection process, the High Court found that the SSB had unduly downgraded Maj Gen Dharmarajan’s merit by invoking the reprimand. The ruling pointed out that while the Selection Board is entitled to exercise discretion in evaluating candidates for promotion, such discretion must adhere to established policies and cannot be influenced by irrelevant factors.
Despite this favorable judgment, the court made it clear that it does not permit Maj Gen Dharmarajan to seek reinstatement or salary post-retirement. The ruling strictly provides for recognition of rank and the recalculation of his pension based on the newly established notional seniority.
