In a significant ruling emphasizing the need for comprehensive welfare and grievance redressal mechanisms for the families of serving defence personnel, the Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh government to formulate a policy with active involvement from senior defence officials.

The Single-Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot issued this direction while hearing a writ petition filed by Sheetal Chaudhary, the wife of an army personnel stationed at a sensitive border area, who alleged harassment by a local individual.

Advocate Vinay Kumar appeared for the petitioner, and ASG Shashi Prakash Singh appeared for the respondent.

Highlighting the vital role of defence personnel and the challenges faced by their families during periods of separation due to military duties, the Court remarked, “Defence personnel perform their high duties even at the peril of their lives. The families of service personnel, often separated due to military exigencies, must be fully protected by the State. A solemn obligation is cast on a grateful nation to ensure their safety and welfare.”

The Court added, "The families of service personnel are often separated due to exigencies of military service. A solemn obligation is cast on a grateful nation to ensure that the families of service personnel who are separated are fully protected and their welfare is catered to by the State Government. Families of military personnel thus separated become vulnerable on account of an unresponsive administration, and the servicemen become despondent while facing an impersonal bureaucracy. The families of defence personnel thus separated cannot be abandoned or left to their own devices by the State. The sacrosanct promise of the State and the pious duty of State officials is thus to ensure the safety, well being and welfare of families of service personnel who are separated due to exigencies of military service. The promise of the State to all defence personnel is irrevocable. The duty of the State officials to redeem the promise is inviolable. This assurance should warm the hearts and fortify the souls of the defence personnel who guard our frontiers."

The Bench criticized the inaction of local authorities, who had failed to address the petitioner’s grievances despite a written request from her husband. Observing that this neglect undermines the morale of servicemen safeguarding the nation, the Court underscored the State’s "sacred duty" to protect and support such families.

The court outlined several key measures for the State government to address:

1. Policy Formation: A welfare and grievance redressal scheme must be developed with input from senior defence officials representing all three armed services.

2. Permanent Apex Committee: An oversight committee comprising senior defence and State officials will supervise the implementation and periodic updates of the policy.

3. Local Committees: Local-level committees, including representatives from the administration and nearby military units, will ensure effective implementation and grievance redressal.

4. Accountability Mechanism: Clear procedures and designated officials must be identified to address grievances promptly, with strict action against officials showing apathy.

The State government expressed its commitment to upgrading the welfare measures in consultation with the armed forces. The court has asked for the policy to address the outlined issues, ensuring robust support for the families of defence personnel.

The Petition was dismissed, with the Court reiterating its stand that the welfare of military families is indispensable to maintaining the morale of those guarding the nation’s frontiers. "Interest of the defence services will be served best and the intent of the State Government shall be realized fruitfully only if such affidavit on behalf of military authorities is filed after due consultation of the GOC-in-C, Central Command with the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. The GOC-in-C, Central Command or his nominated official shall have similar consultations with the two sister services Navy and Air Force. The matter has already been heard in part and the dictation of the judgment has started. Put up this matter on 18.12.2024 in the list of fresh cases at 10 A.M for dictation of the concluding part of the judgement," the Court ordered.

Cause Title: Sheetal Chaudhary v. State Of Up And 3 Others [WRIT A No. 19167 of 2024]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocate Vinay Kumar

Respondent: ASG Shashi Prakash Singh, Addl. AG Ashok Mehta, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel Shubhranshu Shekhar, C.S.C. Suresh Kumar Maurya

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Ajay BhanotAllahabad High Court

Sukriti Mishra