Tweet
Antony blames Army for age row, chief agrees
Defence Minister AK Antony and Army chief General VK Singh on Tuesday were on the same page on the controversy over the latter’s date of birth. Antony put the blame squarely on the Army for the controversy and Gen Singh was in complete agreement. Both also sought to dispel the impression that there was a confrontation brewing between the Government and the Army.
Their comments came three days before the Supreme Court will take a view on Singh’s petition questioning the Defence Ministry’s rejection of his statutory complaint wherein he contended that his correct date of birth is May 10, 1951. The Defence Ministry in its order on December 30 last year said his year of birth is 1950. It also directed the Adjutant General branch of the Army, as late as on January 23, to reconcile it to 1950 instead of 1951.
Reacting to the controversy at length for the first time since it hit the headlines 10 months back and Singh moved the apex court on January 16 this year, Antony said the anomaly arose because two different branches of the Army maintained two different sets of date of birth. While the Adjutant General branch maintains 1951, the Military Secretary branch records 1950 as the Army chief’s year of birth.
“For 36 years, two branches of the same institution maintained two dates of birth and that is why this controversy,” Antony told reporters. “It is unfortunate that it took years together but I don’t agree with some of you that it is a civil-military controversy,” he said.
He said the Government had no role to play in the whole issue as this discrepancy was first noticed in 2006 by the Army Headquarters and reconciled at that level then and later in 2008 by two respective chiefs.
For his part, the Army chief said Antony was “right” in noting that the Army was responsible for the controversy over his age issue. “Absolutely, it is within the Army. After 36 years, you suddenly decide to come up with an issue. There is something wrong with it,” Singh said while responding to the Minister’s remarks.
“Yes, it is a problem in the Army... He is right. There is no doubt about that,” the Army chief said and rejected reports that the Adjutant General branch was dragging its feet on the Defence Ministry’s order to reconcile the year of birth. He said everything does not happen “with the press of a button”.
Denying any confrontation with the Government on the issue of replying to the Defence Ministry’s letter, Singh said, “There is no rift. There is a normal procedure. Letter is sent and it is studied. Everything takes its time. It is not that letter comes and with the press of a button everything is done. We should not see that it happened early or late. I think there is no other point of view in this matter.”
Antony also maintained that the letter “was part of the ongoing process and there was nothing unusual about it”. He said from 2006 to 2009, the Army Headquarters (AHQ) handled and reconciled the age issue at their level and the Government accepted their recommendations and had no role to play in it.
Defence Minister AK Antony and Army chief General VK Singh on Tuesday were on the same page on the controversy over the latter’s date of birth. Antony put the blame squarely on the Army for the controversy and Gen Singh was in complete agreement. Both also sought to dispel the impression that there was a confrontation brewing between the Government and the Army.
Their comments came three days before the Supreme Court will take a view on Singh’s petition questioning the Defence Ministry’s rejection of his statutory complaint wherein he contended that his correct date of birth is May 10, 1951. The Defence Ministry in its order on December 30 last year said his year of birth is 1950. It also directed the Adjutant General branch of the Army, as late as on January 23, to reconcile it to 1950 instead of 1951.
Reacting to the controversy at length for the first time since it hit the headlines 10 months back and Singh moved the apex court on January 16 this year, Antony said the anomaly arose because two different branches of the Army maintained two different sets of date of birth. While the Adjutant General branch maintains 1951, the Military Secretary branch records 1950 as the Army chief’s year of birth.
“For 36 years, two branches of the same institution maintained two dates of birth and that is why this controversy,” Antony told reporters. “It is unfortunate that it took years together but I don’t agree with some of you that it is a civil-military controversy,” he said.
He said the Government had no role to play in the whole issue as this discrepancy was first noticed in 2006 by the Army Headquarters and reconciled at that level then and later in 2008 by two respective chiefs.
For his part, the Army chief said Antony was “right” in noting that the Army was responsible for the controversy over his age issue. “Absolutely, it is within the Army. After 36 years, you suddenly decide to come up with an issue. There is something wrong with it,” Singh said while responding to the Minister’s remarks.
“Yes, it is a problem in the Army... He is right. There is no doubt about that,” the Army chief said and rejected reports that the Adjutant General branch was dragging its feet on the Defence Ministry’s order to reconcile the year of birth. He said everything does not happen “with the press of a button”.
Denying any confrontation with the Government on the issue of replying to the Defence Ministry’s letter, Singh said, “There is no rift. There is a normal procedure. Letter is sent and it is studied. Everything takes its time. It is not that letter comes and with the press of a button everything is done. We should not see that it happened early or late. I think there is no other point of view in this matter.”
Antony also maintained that the letter “was part of the ongoing process and there was nothing unusual about it”. He said from 2006 to 2009, the Army Headquarters (AHQ) handled and reconciled the age issue at their level and the Government accepted their recommendations and had no role to play in it.
