Army Chief Gen V K Singh, who lost his battle with the Defence Ministry on the age row, feels the Supreme Court has “not effectively” closed the issue but ruled out his resignation.
“……as chief of army staff, I have a responsibility towards the army and its men and have to attend to the unfinished tasks that I had set out for myself. I cannot quit until I complete what I have started. Organisational interests are supreme,” he told “Outlook” magazine in an interview.
“It would be dishonest to say that that I was not under pressure to resign. Even my closest advisors were affected by the media interpretation and, yes, I was extremely disappointed that the Supreme Court had not not effectively closed the issue”.
Gen Singh said many commentators were looking at this matter as a classic case of strained civil-military relations, and drew parallels with the unfinished resignation of Gen K S Thimmayya, to predict his resignation.
“But I see the age as something that I and the army have to address, and we will do it once we are given a legal order,” he said in reply to a question about the wide speculation that he would resign since the Supreme Court did not uphold his case.
Gen Singh said the apex court order has created more confusion, without addressing the main issue.
It talks of a statutory complaint being divided into two parts–the process of decision-making on the one hand and maintainability on the other.
“The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has argued that since the decision has been taken by them to peg my Year of Birth as 1950, I must accept this regardless. This goes against the principles of natural justice,” Gen Singh said.
Asked about the impression that he had lost the battle and that the Supreme Court had ruled against him, he said it was a strange situation.
While the apex court was dealing with the case there was a parallel minute-by-minute interpretation of the proceedings in the media.
Breaking news on TV and newspaper headlines the next day delivered their own verdict which declared that ‘the General has lost the battle’.
He said, when the order came out on February 15, the media did not not report it and everyone missed its import.
“It is an innocuous order that leaves recognition of the DoB to the competent authority based on records. The media was reporting obiter dicta in a highly exaggerated manner,” he said.
To a question about his decision to withdraw the petition in the court gave an impression that he was satisfied with what the court had to say, Gen Singh said after his statutory complaint was rejected the Defence Ministry on December 30 last, he had moved the court.
On Feb 3, the court questioned the decision-making process which led to it being turned down and opined that it went against the principles of natural justice.
On February 10, the Attorney General withdrew the Defence Ministry’s order against the statutory complaint and tacitly admitted that the actual DoB was 1951 and that the ministry was opposing it only “on a matter of principle”.