Sunanda Pushkar's autopsy: From Army to AIIMS, why promotions are controversial

What is common among Dr Sudhir Gupta, Lt Gen Dalbir Singh Suhag, Lt Gen Ravi Dastane, Vice Admiral (Retd.) Shekhar Sinha and Lt Gen (Retd.) SK Sinha? Gupta is the current Head of the Department of Forensic Sciences at AIIMS in New Delhi, while the others hail from a military background. But they’re all on one list because each was mired in controversy around their promotion to high offices. Take the latest case of Sudhir Gupta. The professor of Forensic Sciences has shot off a letter on 26 June to the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) alleging that he was under pressure to toe the line of the higher-ups on the autopsy report of Sunanda Pushkar. Pushkar, the wife of former Union minister Shashi Tharoor, died mysteriously at a five-star hotel in New Delhi on 17 January this year. The doctor alleged that since he did not buckle under pressure from the former Union health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad to make changes in the autopsy report, a process was initiated to see him out as head of the department. [caption id=“attachment_1599929” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  AIIMS, Head of the Department of Forensic Sciences and Toxicology, Sudhir Gupta. Image courtesy ibnlive.com[/caption] According to governancenow.com, Gupta was appointed HoD of the forensic sciences department in 2013, bypassing OP Murthy who could not qualify at that time. However, soon after the new director took charge, “Dr Murthy’s disqualification was ignored at AIIMS’s general body meeting to pave way for his (Dr Murthy’s) elevation as the HoD.” The forensic department head blamed Azad for using his position to force him out because he had insisted upon giving a professional assessment on the causes of Pushkar’s death. The truth to these allegations will come out once the CAT and CVC pass their order. The common thread between Gupta’s case and those of the aforementioned others is the deadly mix of dirty office politics, unsolicited political intervention, mudslinging in the open and a scar on the institution. Whether Gupta’s allegations are substantiated will emerge eventually, but he has shown the institution in a bad light. This is true even more so of the Indian Army, believed to be one India’s best professional and disciplined units. It is still unclear if Lt Gen Dalbir Singh Suhag will become the next Army Chief on 31 July this year pending a Supreme Court hearing on a petition filed by Lt Gen Ravi Dastane. Although Union Defence Minister Arun Jaitley announced it in Rajya Sabha that Suhag’s appointment is final, there is no doubt that the SC will have the final word. Now Union minister and former Army Chief Gen (Retd) VK Singh’s ugly spat with the previous UPA government on his age row had already given the army an image it would never aspire to. The controversy surrounding Lt Gen Suhag only makes matters worse and smacks of  personal vendetta. On 13 January last year, the Delhi High Court quashed two promotions of Lt Gen SS Thakral, terming them “illegal”. He was relegated to the lower rank of Brigadier after the court order. “A bench of Justices Gita Mittal and JR Midha quashed the promotions given to Lt Gen SS Thakral, a 1974 batch officer, in 2009 and 2011 saying the Staff Selection Board exercised its powers in “bad faith” and without following established procedures"— a report in The Hindu said. In 1983, former Vice Chief of the Army Staff, Lt Gen (Retd) SK Sinha was denied elevation as the Chief and his junior Lt Gen AS Vaidya, the then GOC-in-C Eastern Command was appointed as General, thanks to a political intervention by the then Indira Gandhi government. It is mind-boggling that despite clear guidelines on promotions, right from the junior most to senior most staff, controversies related to appointments to higher offices continue. For instance, the Department Of Personnel and Training has its own Instructions and Guidelines on Seniority. A lot more data is available online on recruitment and promotion rules of many Central institutions including defence and academia. These controversies regarding promotional hierarchy not only drain resources, chew away valuable time but also divert attention from critical issues. It is ironic that the judiciary is itself not out of this quagmire. The controversy surrounding senior advocate Gopal Subramanium’s withdrawal of candidature for appointment as a Supreme Court judge is the latest example. Unless institutions are kept free of avoidable controversies like promotions at the top, which should happen on prescribed norms, it will be foolish to expect these institutions to deliver at their best.