NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the Center to discontinue adhering to British-era norms on retirement age and service conditions for armed forces personnel, and to consider setting up an expert committee to reconsider the criteria for “highly skilled” coast guards.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalia Bagchi stayed an order of the Delhi High Court, which had ruled that the Indian Coast Guard should have a uniform retirement age of 60 for all ranks.
CJI Kant told Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave, “It is time to review these regulations governing conditions of service and retirement age. The government cannot abide by the conditions envisaged and formulated in the British era. No one these days can imagine the role played by the Coast Guard. The current retirement age seems to follow an old pattern.”
The bench was hearing the Union government’s appeal against the Delhi High Court’s order issued last year striking down Rule 20 and Rule 20 of the Coast Guard Rules, 1986, which stipulated that officers of the rank of Commander and below would retire at the age of 57 years, while those above Commander would retire at the age of 60 years.
The Supreme Court observed that experience is of great importance in such a strong, sophisticated and highly skilled force, and the government should not be “too rigid or too conservative” in its approach to conditions of service.
The bench ordered “notice to be issued. Meanwhile, implementation of the impugned judgment will remain suspended till further orders… Counter affidavit may be filed within two weeks. List the order after two weeks.”
She added: “However, we direct the union to form a committee of experts to reconsider the conditions of service of Coast Guard members, especially with regard to the age of conscription to retirement age, with the report being submitted to this court.”
Dave asserted that the Supreme Court was wrong in comparing the Coast Guard, which comes under the Ministry of Defence, with other forces such as the Indo-Tibetan Border Police, the Central Reserve Police Force, the Central Industrial Security Forces and the Sashastra Seema Bal Forces.
She stressed that the work of the Coast Guard is completely different from the work of other forces, and that they face more harsh conditions at sea, similar to the Navy, which requires a younger workforce.
Dave also argued that if the Supreme Court order was not intervened, it would open a Pandora’s box, where similar relief would be sought from other branches of the defense forces.
She stated that the retirement age in the armed forces was carefully linked to the recruitment age to ensure a specific period of service, and that these matters fall within the scope of the policy.
On November 24, the Supreme Court ruled that the retirement age of 60 should be applied uniformly to all ranks of Indian Coast Guard officers, striking down a rule stipulating different retirement ages for different ranks.
The Supreme Court considered this ruling “unconstitutional.”
Under the impugned rule, officers of the rank of Commander and below in the Indian Coast Guard were to retire at the age of 57 years, while officers above the rank of Commander were to retire at the age of 60 years.
“In the absence of any factor indicating a rational relationship between setting different ages of retirement for officers of the rank of Commander and below and officers above the rank of Commander in the Coast Guard, we are constrained to hold that Rules 20 and 20 of the 1986 Rules, insofar as they set different ages of retirement, are unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.” The court said in a detailed order.
It had said that Rule 20 and 20 of the Coast Guard Rules, 1986, could not support scrutiny of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and held that the retirement age of 60 years would apply to Coast Guard officers of all ranks.
Article 14 relates to the equality of all individuals before the law, and Article 16 deals with equal opportunities in public office.
The Supreme Court had passed the order on a batch of petitions filed by retired Coast Guard officers, who were in service at the time of filing the petitions, but retired at the age of 57 years as per the rules.
The retired officers challenged the constitutionality of Rule 20 and said that retiring officers above the rank of commander at 60 and other officers at 57 leads to unfair and unconstitutional discrimination.
The Supreme Court had observed that earlier, a similar dispute involving officers of the Border Security Force, CRPF, ITBP and SSB was decided by a division bench of the Supreme Court.
The central government justified the lowering of the retirement age, saying the Coast Guard is a maritime service that requires “young age specifications” and medically fit personnel to operate flight decks and aviation, command and control issues, personnel and career progression.
This article was generated from an automated news feed without any modifications to the text.
