Supreme Court Upholds Denial of NOC to Airman Without Prior IAF Permission

• Supreme Court upholds denial of NOC to Airman who applied for civil post without prior permission under IAF Order No. 33/2017.
• Prior permission is a mandatory requirement for Airmen seeking outside employment, and failure to obtain it may result in denial of NOC even after selection.
• The Supreme Court's judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to departmental orders for armed forces personnel seeking outside employment.

Where the consequence of non-compliance is expressly stipulated, such as the rejection of a request for a No Objection Certificate, these provisions cannot be waived at the will of the individual, as they are essential for maintaining operational preparedness and manning levels.

The Supreme Court has delivered a significant judgment in the case of Nakhat Singh, an Airman who had applied for a civil post without prior permission under Air Force Order No. 33/2017. The court held that an Airman cannot seek a No Objection Certificate (NOC) after selection if they have not obtained prior permission from their superior before applying for the civil post.

The court's decision has far-reaching implications for Air Force personnel who wish to transition to civilian life. It highlights the importance of adhering to the mandatory requirements prescribed under departmental orders for armed forces personnel seeking outside employment.

In this case, Nakhat Singh had completed seven years of service and applied for the post of Assistant Professor in Hindi. He cleared the written examination and interview but was denied an NOC by the competent authority. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, ruling that the Airman's failure to obtain prior permission was a critical factor in the denial of the NOC.

The Supreme Court's judgment is based on the provisions of Air Force Order (AFO) No. 33/2017, which prescribes the eligibility criteria for Airmen to apply for civil posts after obtaining prior permission from the competent authority. The order aims to balance the personal aspirations of Airmen with the organisational requirements of the Indian Air Force.

Clause 19 of the AFO makes it clear that permission to apply for a civil post is different from the subsequent grant of an NOC by the competent authority. Clause 20 clarifies that both permissions are privileges and cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

The Supreme Court's interpretation of these clauses underscores the importance of adhering to the mandatory requirements prescribed under departmental orders for armed forces personnel seeking outside employment.

The Supreme Court's judgment has significant implications for Air Force personnel who wish to transition to civilian life. It emphasizes the importance of obtaining prior permission under IAF Order No. 33/2017 before applying for civil posts.

Lawyers advising Air Force personnel on career transition should note that failure to obtain prior permission may result in denial of NOC even after selection. This highlights the need for Airmen to carefully follow the prescribed procedure and seek prior permission from their superior before applying for civil posts.

The judgment also underscores the importance of maintaining operational preparedness and manning levels within the Indian Air Force.

Lawyers advising Air Force personnel on career transition should note that obtaining prior permission under IAF Order No. 33/2017 is a mandatory requirement for applying for civil posts, and failure to do so may result in denial of NOC even after selection.

Source: Original reporting via Supreme Court Judgments