Thaindian News

New Delhi, May 20 (IANS) The government Friday was still undecided on army chief General V.K. Singh’s correct date of birth even after it got legal opinion on the raging controversy from both the law ministry and the attorney general, with Defence Minister A.K. Antony shying away from a direct response on the matter.

All Antony said was that he did not want a “public controversy” on the matter relating to the armed forces and appealed to the media not to “sensationalise” it.

“Nothing today. Whenever we take a decision, I will inform you. I don’t want a public controversy on this now. When we take a decision, we will inform you,” he told reporters who asked for his response on the confusion over the correct date of birth of Gen. Singh.

“My request is try to avoid public controversy on issues involving the services. Whenever the government takes a decision, we will convey it to you,” he said.

When reporters pressed for a response, Antony said: “I told you, this is my personal request. On matters of the services, please do not sensationalise. Please avoid public controversies. After considering all aspects, the government will take a decision and we will convey to you.”

On Thursday, Attorney General Goolam E. Vahanvati recommended to the ministry that any change in the date of birth at this stage should be “legally sustainable”.

With this perspective from country’s senior-most legal officer, the ball is now in the defence ministry’s court on deciding the age of the present army chief, which could send into a disarray the plan of succession of chief of the 1.13-million strong army.

The confusion over Gen. Singh’s age cropped up in 2008 after the army’s military secretary branch records of his Union Public Service Commission applications showed his date of birth as May 10, 1950, while the adjutant general’s branch had May 10, 1951, on its records.

The military secretary handles appointments and promotions, and adjutant general pay and pension.

The issue came up once again earlier this year after a set of Right to Information (RTI) application sought details of his date of birth and the army referred the requests to the defence ministry, which in turn first asked the law ministry to give its opinion on this age confusion.

The law ministry, in its reply, recommended that the school leaving certificate of the army chief would have to be taken as a legal document to certify the date of birth. The school leaving certificate, however, shows 1951 as the year of Gen. Singh’s birth. Later, the defence ministry sought the attorney general’s views on the issue.

If 1950 is maintained as Gen. Singh’s year of birth, then present Eastern Army commander Lt.Gen. Bikram Singh would in all likelihood be the next chief. If 1951 is sustained, then Northern Army commander Lt.Gen. K.T. Parnaik would be the next in line to take over from Gen. Singh.

However, Gen.Singh’s appointment as the chief of the army staff was issued on the basis of the military secretary branch’s documents, which mention 1950 as the year of his birth.

With the attorney general now asking the defence ministry to decide on the age on the basis of facts that are sustainable in a court of law, it would now be Antony’s call.