Agnipath scheme well thought policy decision with national security at its heart: Delhi High Court

Agnipath scheme is a well thought out policy decision with the laudable objective of maintaining national security at its heart, the Delhi High Court said while upholding the constitutional validity of the scheme..A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad said that scheme is not arbitrary, capricious or devoid of reason and, therefore, cannot be interfered with."Considering the fact that the laudable objective of maintaining national security is at the heart of the impugned scheme, this Court does not find it arbitrary, capricious or devoid of reason," the court said. .Agnipath proposes to induct youth temporarily into the defence forces for a period of four years. Such youth will be known as Agniveer.After this period, out of the selected candidates, only 25 per cent will be absorbed into regular service of the armed forces while the rest will be retired.The period of service as Agniveer will not be counted as regular service on joining the Indian Army, Navy or Air Force. That is, once an Agniveer joins the armed forces after completion of four years, it will be considered as fresh recruitment.The introduction of the scheme had led to widespread protests across the country and several petitions were filed in various High Courts against it. The Supreme Court later transferred all the cases to the Delhi High Court. .In a detailed judgment pronounced today, the High Court dismissed all the petitions challenging the scheme. The Court also rejected the pleas which had challenged the halt on recruitment processes in the armed forces whose advertisements were issued prior to introduction of the scheme. The bench said that rather than focusing on the alleged political motives of Agnipath, it is necessary to focus on the benefits that are being provided.“A Scheme such as the one impugned herein will not only help in the personal development of the individuals who are recruited at a young age, but it will also equip the youth of the country with necessary skills that can aid them to secure better paying opportunities in fields to which they are specifically suited," the Court said. It added, “The scheme would, therefore, benefit in the growth and betterment of an individual which will only help in the growth and betterment of the nation. It is through this prism that one must assess the impugned scheme.”On the concern that Agniveers who leave the armed forces after four years may get involved in illegal activities, the bench said that the Agniveers will be given appropriate certificate for experience and will therefore, be in a better position to gain meaningful employment."Needless to state that four years training period would also instill a sense of nationalism in these personnel that would more or less prompt them to use their skills and focus on the development of the country.".The Court further said that the scheme has many advantages and they cannot be overlooked and dislodged on the basis of the apprehension that after four years such individuals may be unemployed or that they may take to illegal or unethical activities, after being trained in the Army. The court also referred to the recent skirmishes on the border and said such transgressions exacerbate the need to have a leaner and fitter Armed Force which is capable of handling the mental and physical distress that accompanies service in the armed forces..On the petitions challenging the halt on different recruitment processes due to introduction of Agnipath, the bench said that the candidates had no vested right to seek such recruitment."...both promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation cannot be applied in the instant case to force the Government to complete the recruitment keeping in mind larger public interest," the bench concluded. .Advocates Prashant Bhushan, Alice Raj, SuroorMander, KN Jayasankar, Beena Nair, Ashish Mohan, Samarth Chaudhary, Chhavi Yadav, Ajit Kakkar, Arunava Mukherjee, Kumud Lata Das, Manoj Singh, Manoj Mahaur, Harsh Ajay Singh, Ankur Chhibber, HS Tiwari, Anshuman Mehrotra, Nikunj Arora, Dinesh Kr Goswami, Rohit Pandey, Vaibhav Maheshwari, Varad Dwivedi, Munisha Anand, Adhyam Gupta, Nisha Thakur, Manohar Lal Sharma, Suman, DK Garg, Abhishek Garg, Dhananjay Garg, Ishaan Tiwari, Ram Naresh Yadav, Kamal Kapoor, Gautam Dhamija, Dania Nayyar, Tejaswi Bhanu, Virendra Rawat, Krishnamohan Menon, Dania Nayyar, Gautam Dhamija, Chaitanyashil Priyadarshi, Tejaswi Bhanu, Parul Sachdeva, Saloni Sharma, Sumit Kulkarni, Vijay Singh, Pawan Kumar Nadia, Suman Saharan, Anuj Sharma, Divesh Gupta, B Aloor and Sathesh KR appeared for the petitioners. Wing Commander Pradeep Kumar S Pillai (Retd.) appeared as petitioner in person in one of the cases. The Central government was represented through Additional Solicitor Generals Aishwarya Bhati and Chetan Sharma along with Cental Government Standing Counsel Anurag Ahluwalia, Harish Vaidyanathan and Kirtiman Singh. They were assisted by advocates Amit Gupta, Srish Kumar Mishra, Chaitanya Puri, Sanjana Nangia, Saurabh Tripathi, Kunjala Bhardwaj, Saurabh Tripathi, Madhav Bajaj, Waize Ali, Rishav Dubey, Danish Faraz Khan, Sagar Mehlawat, Manvendra Singh, Abhijeet Singh, Aman Sharma, Rustam Singh Chauhan, Shivika Mehra, BLN Shivani, Vidhi Jain, Durgeshnadini, Rahul Sharma, Prashant Singh, Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Aishwary Mishra and Aditya Singh. .[Read Judgment]