Sukhna Land Scam-Lt gen. Avadesh moves military tribunal:Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.

Sukna Land Scam.
Lt Gen Avadesh moves military tribunal.
Vijay MohanTribune News Service
Chandigarh- February 3.Former Military Secretary Lt Gen Avadesh
Prakash, one of the four generals held blameworthy in the Sukna
land scam, today moved the Armed Forces Tribunal challenging
the court-martial proceedings against him, it is learnt.
The matter is scheduled to come up for hearing before the Delhi
Bench tomorrow.
Lt Gen Prakash, who superannuated on January 31, has been
attached to Headquarters Western Command for the purpose of
disciplinary action to be initiated against him. He is believed to
have challenged the attachment order and associated proceedings,
alleging malafide and arbitrariness on the part of the defence
ministry.
Army chief Gen Deepak Kapoor had directed administrative action
against Prakash, but Defence Minister AK Antony had “advised”
the chief to initiate disciplinary proceedings. While disciplinary
proceedings were ordered against Maj Gen PK Rath, administrative
action was ordered against Lt Gen Ramesh Halgali and Maj Gen
PC Sen.
Earlier, Antony had questioned this disparity. Disciplinary
proceedings entail a possible trial by court martial, which is
equivalent to a criminal trial by a sessions court whereas
administrative action is akin to departmental action.
As Military Secretary, Prakash was one of the eight principal staff
officers (PSO) at Army Headquarters who control and oversee
the administrative, training and logistical aspects of the entire
Army. Prakash is the senior-most officer against whom disciplinary
proceedings have been ordered. Another lieutenant general who
headed the Amy’s supply and transport directorate is also amidst
court-martial proceedings, but by virtue of being a PSO, Prakash’s
stature was higher.
Opinion in the service community over Antony’s “advice” is divided.
Some view it as political interference and violation of the Army’s
time-tested and established judicial system. Others are of the opinion
that the armed forces were subservient and answerable to the elected
political executive and as head of the defence establishment, Antony
had a legal and moral responsibility to order appropriate action.
Further, Section 109 of the Army Act implicitly states that the power
to convene a general court martial vested with the Union government
or the Army chief or other officers empowered in this regard.