Justifying the dismissal of three Indian Air Force (IAF) officials including a Wing Commander for gross negligence, the Centre on Tuesday told the Delhi High Court that the accidental firing of a BrahMos combat missile into Pakistan in March last year affected the relations of the nation with the neighbouring country and led to a loss of Rs 24 crores to the state exchequer.
The Centre in an affidavit said that the trial of three officers by a court martial was “inexpedient”, in reply to a petition by Wing Commander Abhinav Sharma against his termination from service. The affidavit mentioned that this was considering the sensitive nature of evidence on record and “also the fact that the international community was interested to know the important practical details regarding the firing of missile”.
The Union government said, “Considering the sensitive nature of the subject matter having widespread ramifications for the security of the State, a conscious and considered decision was taken in good faith to terminate the service of the petitioner under the President’s pleasure clause. Such a decision has been taken in the Indian Air Force after 23 years as facts and circumstances of the case warranted such action.”
Wing Commander Abhinav Sharma had challenged the termination order that was issued against him under section 18 of Air Force Act, 1950. He was posted as an engineering officer when the incident had taken place. In his petition filed on behalf of him by advocate Jaitegan Singh, the IAF officer contended that he was imparted professional and practical training only for maintenance duties and not on conduct of operations.
He said that he performed all his duties according to the Combat SOP governing the operations and that the cause of the incident was solely operational in nature. The Centre, defending its decision to terminate the officers said that the petitioner was provided all due opportunities during the proceedings of the Court of Inquiry to present his case and he was given great latitude in this regard.
The decision to terminate the service of the petitioner was objective, just and required due to the peculiar nature of the subject matter, the Centre said, adding that besides causing potential threat to any airborne/ground object/personnel and also causing damage to the reputation of the IAF and the country at large, the government exchequer lost money in the accidental firing.
The reply said, “It is indeed ironic that the petitioner has attempted to shift his blame to other officers knowing full well that his failures contributed significantly to the launch of the missile.”
Moreover, the Centre also said that it was unwilling to discuss the evidence on record in its reply as it will have an adverse impact on the security of the State. The proceedings of the Court of Inquiry will be shown to the court to duly establish the lapses of the petitioner, it added.
The Centre’s reply said, “Likewise, it was also decided that initiation of action under Section 19 of the Air Force Act, 1950 read with Rule 16 of the Air Force Rules, 1969 by issuing a Show Cause Notice for dismissal/removal from the Service would bring the sensitive and secret issues in full public domain which would be prejudicial to the security interests of the State. Accordingly, a considered decision was taken by the competent authority to terminate the services of the petitioner and two other above stated officers under Section 18 of the Air Force Act, 1950, which stipulates that ‘every person subject to the Air Force Act, 1950 shall hold office during the pleasure of the President.”
It may be noted that India had fired a BrahMos missile into Pakistan on March 9, last year, mistakenly with human error behind the unprecedented incident. Two days after the accidental launch, India had attributed the incident to a technical malfunction during routine maintenance on March 11.
Moreover, Union defence minister Rajnath Singh also said that the standard operating procedures (SOPs) for “operations, maintenance, and inspection” of such systems were being reviewed.
While Pakistan registered a protest over the “unprovoked violation of its airspace by a supersonic flying object of Indian origin”, both sides avoided a hostile or escalatory tone.
Three IAF officers were sacked after a court of inquiry held them responsible for deviating from SOPs six months later on August 23. Challenging the decision Wing Commander Abhinav Sharma moved the court on March 1.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Centre on the last date told the court on the last date that the accidental firing embarrassed India before the international community and could have led to a warlike situation between the two countries.
The petitioner was gainfully employed with a multinational company with a high salary and approached the court after more than six months since his termination order was passed, ASG Sharma submitted before the court.
However, the court issued notices to the ministry of defence, the chief of air staff and others on Sharma’s petition and sought a detailed response within six weeks.
