Delhi High Court
Ex/Mer Kamal Singh vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 13 September, 2002
Author: Khan
Bench: B Khan, J Kapoor
JUDGMENT
Khan, J.
1. Petitioner was enrolled in NAVY as sailor on
8.8.1994 and put on training. After 20 days or so he
was discharged by order dated 29.8.1994 under Navy
Regulations 278. He challenges this on the ground that
the order was founded on his misconduct, was penal in
nature, cast stigma on him and was violative of
principles of natural justice as now show cause notice
was issued to him. He also claims that he was not
discharged by the Captain of Training establishment and
relies upon several Supreme Court judgments to suggest
that he was entitled to show cause notice and prays for
quashing of this order.
2. Respondents stand is that he was found
unsuitable by the Captain of the training
establishment, INS Chilka during his training after he
had failed to qualify the entry behavior test in which
he had obtained only 34% marks against the prescribed
requisite standard of 50% marks. The discharge order
was based on his weakness in academics and poor
performance in basic training course and not on his
misconduct or illness. It is explained he and 13 other
trainees were found untrainable for Naval Service and
were interviewed by the Commanding Officer who had
found them unable to cope with the pace of training.
On this, petitioner's discharge order was approved by
the Captain, Training establishment.
3. All that falls for consideration is whether
petitioner was required to be given any show cause
notice before passing of order of discharge. The
relevant provision of Regulation 278 reads thus:-
" REGULATION 278
(4) Any Boy, Artificer Apprentice or Men, during
probationary service, shall be liable to be discharged
as "Unsuitable" under orders of the authorities herein
stated, if his progress or conduct is unsatisfactory."
(c) Direct Entry Sailors--by the Captain of the
Training Establishment concerned during the period of
training and thereafter by the Captain Naval Barracks.
4. The Regulation authorises the Captain of
Training establishment to discharge a trainee sailor as
unsuitable if his progress or conduct is found
unsatisfactory. Given regard to the stand of
respondents that petitioner had failed to make grade in
the entry behaviors test and was found week in
academics and training progress and was interviewed by
the Commanding Officer for this, his order of discharge
cannot be said to have been passed on misconduct. On
the contrary, it was apparently passed on his
unsatisfactory progress in the training.
5. It would be over-stretching the principles of
natural justice to hold that petitioner was entitled to
any show cause notice before his discharge. The
relevant regulation empowers the Captain to assess his
performance in the training and if he is found wanting
or untrainable for the Navy, he cannot insist on his
continuation despite his bad or poor performance. Nor
does it fall within the domain of the court to
interfere in such assessment and evaluation. The
requirements of Navy areal together different from any
other service and if a trainee Sailor fails to meet
these, he cannot seek retention on the specious plea of
violation of principle of natural justice, any analogy
drawn from same rule position in civil service. We
have gone through the judgments cited by L/C for
petitioner but we do not find any one of these relevant
on the point. As a matter of fact petitioner seems to
be misdirecting his case by assuming that he was
discharged on some misconduct ignoring that he had
failed to come up to the mark in the training.
This petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.
