S. P. Pandey Vs Union of India & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court considered an appeal filed by S. P. Pandey, an Indian Air Force airman, who sought compensation despite having already succeeded before the Armed Forces Tribunal in getting the punishment of Admonition dated 18.01.2011 quashed. The case arose from an incident on 17.05.2010 at a railway crossing, where the appellant was alleged to have overtaken vehicles and parked his motorcycle at the front of the queue. A Squadron Leader questioned his conduct, confiscated his motorcycle keys, ordered him to the Guard Room, and disciplinary proceedings were initiated on allegations of violating good order and Air Force discipline and using insubordinate language. The appellant was initially awarded an Admonition on 18.05.2010. Subsequently, the authorities informed him in writing that the punishment would be cancelled, the Admonition entry expunged, and the punishment deleted from his service records. Despite these assurances, a fresh disciplinary proceeding was initiated on the same charges, resulting in a second Admonition dated 18.01.2011. The appellant’s representations and statutory remedies within the Air Force were rejected, leading him to approach the Armed Forces Tribunal.
The Armed Forces Tribunal found that the entire episode originated from a trivial incident in a civil area and observed that the Squadron Leader’s reaction was disproportionate. It noted that the officer forcefully took away the motorcycle keys, ordered the appellant into custody, and that the appellant was confined in a cell. The Tribunal observed that the incident could have been handled by counselling the appellant rather than escalating the matter. It also found that the appellant had been assured twice in writing that the punishment would be expunged, yet the authorities proceeded afresh, indicating vindictiveness. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the Summary of Evidence, the Admonition dated 18.01.2011, and the orders rejecting the appellant’s representations, but declined to grant compensation.
