Leakage of Indian Army Chief’s Age: Probe Ordered

[Xeric]

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan's Premier NEWS Agency ) - Leakage of Indian Army Chief’s Age: Probe Ordered

Leakage of Indian Army Chief’s Age: Probe Ordered

NEW DELHI, April 29 (APP): The Indian Army has launched a probe into the leakage of conflicting sources regarding the age of Indian Army Chief, which has led to extensive speculation not only regarding the length of his tenure but also its possible impact on the line of succession as well.The leak, from yet to be ascertained sources, has revealed a year’s discrepancy in the records concerning the age of Indian Chief of the Army Staff, General V.K. Singh.

According to the Adjutant General (AG) Branch, which is responsible for salary and pension, the Army Chief’s date of birth is May 10, 1951 where as with the Military Secretary’s Branch, which plans postings and promotions the same is reflected as May 10, 1950.
As per rules in the Indian Army, an Army Chief can serve for tenure of three years or up to the age of 62, whichever is earlier.
If the date held by the AG Branch, which is reportedly based on the Matriculation certificate, is accepted then, the General, instead of retiring in Jun 2012 will get an extension of additional ten months.
In the balance hangs the fate of General Singh’s successor; if he retires as planned in June 2012 then Lt Gen Bikram Singh will be the front runner and if he gets an extension then Lt Gen K.T Parnaik will most likely succeed him.
According to observers the leakage of highly sensitive documents held in the MS Branch’s custody to public domain indicates that various cliques in the Indian top brass establishment have started jockeying for securing the top slot in Indian Army for their favourite aspirant. Even the office of the Indian COAS can’t be held above suspicion, says analysts.

 

[JayAtl]

must get to bottom of this- berry berry important

 

[Xeric]

http://globalspin.blogs.time.com/20...ias-army-chief-challenges-his-own-government/

Not Just a Pakistani Problem: India’s Army Chief Challenges His Own Government

By Jyoti Thottam | January 17, 2012

Side by side on the front page of today’s Hindu newspaper are two stories about conflict between the Army and the civilian government in two South Asian countries. One of them, of course, is Pakistan, a country whose political leaders have struggled for most of its history to keep the Army in check. What’s the other? Bangladesh, where an Army-backed caretaker government ruled for two years? Sri Lanka, where a former Army chief is serving three years in prison for implicating the government that appointed him in war crimes? Or perhaps Nepal, where the biggest obstacle to political stability is integrating former Maoist rebels into the Army that once fought against them?

The answer, surprisingly, is India, a country that has never come close to military rule in its 64 years of independence. Civilian control of the military is one principle that unites every political party, and one that the Indian Army proudly submits to. And yet it has come to this: General V.K. Singh, India’s current Army chief, has filed a petition with the Supreme Court challenging the very government that appointed him. The issue before the court is an arcane bureaucratic tussle over his date of birth; underneath the surface is a story about the hidden decline of an institution that was once the most respected in India.

Like many people in India, Singh lacks a birth certificate, so he has relied on his school records to establish his date of birth. The records he submitted when he joined the Army included a discrepancy — two dates, a year apart. Singh maintains that he was actually born in 1951 and has used that date on his passport and other personal documents. The 1950 date, he says, was a clerical mistake on one record. This kind of discrepancy is also common and might never have become a problem for Singh, except that 1950 is the date he used when he entered the upper ranks of India’s military leadership. India’s top brass, like their peers almost anywhere, jockey fiercely for promotion, and the competition is particularly intense at the highest levels, where age, rank and politics all play a role.

Singh’s supporters say that he was pressured to accept 1950 as his date of birth in order to ensure that he would retire in 2012 (the mandatory retirement age is 62), and thus clear the way for other ambitious officers to succeed him. An Army chief can serve for up to three years, so if Singh retired next year, it would exclude some potential successors. Singh has been fighting for months to get the Ministry of Defense to change the record to 1951, and having exhausted all his administrative options, he decided on Monday to take his case to the Supreme Court. It is the first time in history that a sitting Army chief has challenged the civilian government in this way, and the Indian media are aghast at the unseemly spectacle. “Self before service” read the cover of the newsmagazine India Today.

Why does one year make so much difference? It’s more than just a desire to remain in command, as his detractors claim; Singh will also earn a generous pension and benefits regardless of when he retires. It’s something darker, according to a group of retired Army officers who have been lobbying for the chief. One of them, Col. Brijraj Singh, told me that the row over the chief’s age is payback for his tough stand on corruption. Since taking command as Army chief, he has launched a series of investigations into allegations of corruption within the top ranks of the Army. An investigation into a controversial Mumbai high-rise found that two generals, including Singh’s predecessor as Army Chief, Deepak Kapoor, had been allotted flats in the building, which was meant for Kargil veterans and their widows. At the Defence Ministry’s request, Kapoor and several other high-ranking officials are now the subject of a probe by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation. Another investigation ordered by Singh into a land deal in West Bengal ended with the conviction of a lieutenant general by a court martial for conduct unbecoming an officer and intent to defraud. “When he [V.K. Singh] took over he said, I am going to set the health of the army right,” the colonel told me. “By health, he means I am going to make the army corruption free.” For that, his supporters say V.K. Singh has become a target. If he retires this year, the next in line as Army Chief will be Lt. Gen. Bikram Singh, a man whom V.K. Singh’s supporters say is close to those accused in the corruption cases.

This unprecedented internal battle has embarrassed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s government, which has left the matter to the judiciary. Until it makes a ruling, India is left with one high-profile Supreme Court petition, several criminal cases and a months-long whispering campaign pitting top Army officers against each other. It’s hard to believe this is the same institution that produced men like Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw and generations of Army families who have been one of India’s quiet sources of strength. In almost every city and small town in India, you’ll find retired Army officers and their wives as the mainstays of civic groups and social service organizations. In my own reporting, I have met people from every imaginable profession who credit their Army upbringing as a source of discipline, adaptability and self-confidence. What I rarely find these days are Army officers who want their children to follow them in military service rather than the more lucrative private sector. The Indian Army was once unique, a vocation for a certain segment of the educated middle classes. It is now — like so many other venerable institutions in India — struggling just to maintain its dignity.

 

[KS]

Comparison with the Pak generals dictating policies and Indian general just asking the Govt to correct the mistake in his DOB is a mistake on the part of the author.

Multiple legal records have clearly shown that Gen V.K.Singh was born in the year 1951 and yet this Govt insists that his retirement date be calculated based on an alleged informal understanding they had with him which put his DOB at 1950. This chicanery of the Govt to replace him with an allegedly more 'pliable' Gen. Bikram Singh was a crude move in politicizing the last remaining apolitical institution in India - Army and the Chief was well his rights to challenge it in a way the Constitution sees fit - through the courts.

The 1950 date, he says, was a clerical mistake on one record. This kind of discrepancy is also common and might never have become a problem for Singh, except that 1950 is the date he used when he entered the upper ranks of India’s military leadership.

This part is a pure media creation at the behest of the Congress Govt. His age as in Army records is May 10 1951 and not 1950.

---------- Post added at 11:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 PM ----------

As read from IA fans FB page:

Why this chief is sore in their eye?

1. Not part of arms lobby-govt nexus.
2. Pressing cases against Adarsh, Sukna scammers.
3. Conveyed army’s independent view on AFSPA and opposed its removal.
4. Opposed involvement of Army in anti-naxal operations.
5. Army did not play game on Anna’s character.
6. Trying to clear army of corruption (honest army is too dangerous for corrupts).
7. Tried to assert his position as chief to much disliking of Govt (not behaving like head chowkidars).

 

[Xeric]

So there is a 'dark side' to this episode, right?

 

[Polemos]

Army and the Chief was well his rights to challenge it in a way the Constitution sees fit - through the courts.

Absolutely correct.The chief is not trying to undermine the constitution; he is not attempting a coup. He is merely asserting his rights as any government employee would; through the proper channel. If anything its the government's image that has been sullied for bringing its dirty politics into the army.

 

[Xeric]

Ahan...if that be the case, wonder why the Pakistani COAS showing his concerns, let's say on the Memo issue (which is well within his rights while being responsible for the men under his command) pinch the indians so hard?

 

[Polemos]

Doesnt bother me. Of course India has no history of military coups. That combined with Pakistan's current security problems, and general public mistrust of the government. Of course, India has security problems of her own, and also the government is under a lot of pressure, but no one dreams of a coup.

 

[livingdead]

Ahan...if that be the case, wonder why the Pakistani COAS showing his concerns, let's say on the Memo issue (which is well within his rights while being responsible for the men under his command) pinch the indians so hard?

This is a personal court case which army chief has to fight himself. Indian army is not involved in it. It is same as any other court case an army man can get into, in this case he is army chief.

Indian army chief would not have complained to court about a memo, probably a civilian would have filed a petition in India(called PIL) or court would have taken suomoto notice.

 

[Xeric]

Coup? Who said anything about a coup? Or may be you guys think that this perhaps is the case?

P.S. Till the time your COAS is in chair, he alone would not be fighting 'his' case. re a Pakistani COAS ruling Pakistan and the entire Army getting blamed for it.