The Supreme Court has asked the Central Government not to stick to the British era norms in the matter of service conditions and retirement age of armed forces personnel. The court said that the Center should consider constituting an expert committee to reconsider the parameters of the highly skilled Indian Coast Guard.
The bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi stayed the order of the Delhi High Court, which had directed to implement the retirement age of 60 years uniformly at all levels in the Indian Coast Guard.
CJI Surya Kant told Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave, ‘The time has come to review these rules related to service conditions and retirement age. The government cannot remain stuck on the rules made during the British era. No one can imagine how important the role of the Coast Guard is in today’s times. The current retirement age appears to follow the old system.
The Supreme Court was hearing the Central Government’s appeal, challenging last year’s order of the Delhi High Court to cancel Rules 20(1) and 20(2) of the Coast Guard (General) Rules, 1986. Under these rules, officers of the level of Commandant and below retired at the age of 57 years, while officers of the level above Commandant retired at the age of 60 years.
The Supreme Court said that in such an advanced and highly skilled force, experience has special significance and the government should not adopt an overly static or conservative approach in the matter of service conditions. The court ordered, ‘Notice should be issued. Meanwhile, the disputed decision will be stayed till the next hearing…The counter affidavit can be filed within two weeks. After this the matter should be listed in two weeks.
The Supreme Court said that however, we direct the Central Government to form an expert committee to review the conditions of service of Coast Guard personnel, especially from the age of recruitment to the age of retirement. The report of this committee should be presented in this court.
On behalf of ASG Archana Pathak Dave, it was argued that the High Court had committed an error by treating other security forces like Indo-Tibetan Border Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Central Industrial Security Force and Sashastra Seema Bal. He argued that the Coast Guard, a security force under the Ministry of Defence, has to operate in very difficult conditions at sea and requires relatively young and fully medically competent personnel.
Archana Pathak Dave also argued that a fixed service period is ensured by linking the retirement age with the recruitment age and this is a matter of policy. He also said that if the High Court order is not interfered with, similar demands may be raised in other defense services also.
The Delhi High Court had said in its order on November 24 that there is no logical basis behind setting different retirement ages for different levels in the Coast Guard and this system violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The court declared rules 20(1) and 20(2) unconstitutional and directed to apply the retirement age of 60 years equally for all posts. This order was passed on petitions filed by retired officers of the Coast Guard.
