DOCSLIB.ORG

Command and Control of Special Operations Forces Missions in the US Northern Command Area of Responsibility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Command and Control of Special Operations Forces Missions in the US Northern Command Area of Responsibility Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2005-03 Command and control of Special Operations Forces missions in the US Northern Command Area of Responsibility McGregor, Otis W., III Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/2198 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS COMMAND AND CONTROL OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES MISSIONS IN THE US NORTHERN COMMAND AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY by Otis W. McGregor III March 2005 Thesis Advisor: Christopher Bellavita Second Reader: Robert Simeral Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED March 2005 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Command and Control of Special Operations Forces Missions in the US Northern Command Area of Responsibility 6. AUTHOR Lieutenant Colonel Otis W. McGregor III 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION REPORT Monterey, CA 93943-5000 NUMBER 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING N/A AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) The need for a well thought out, planned, and rehearsed command and control organization to conduct special operations in the US Northern Command Area of Responsibility is vital to success in defending the Homeland. Currently, USNORTHCOM does not have an apportioned or assigned command and control structure for the conduct of special operations. This thesis analyzes three courses of action to fulfill this requirement: use the current USNORTHCOM battle staff command structure including the integration of the Standing Joint Force Headquarters-North; rely on the newly formed US Special Operations Command’s Joint Task Force Structures; and establish a Theater Special Operations Command North assigned to USNORTHCOM. Through the conduct of analysis and research this thesis recommends that The Joint Staff direct the reorganization required to establish a Theater Special Operations Command North to exercise command and control of special operations forces conducting operations in the USNORTHCOM AOR. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Special Operations Forces (SOF), Homeland Security (HLS), Homeland 15. NUMBER OF Defense (HLD), US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), Command and Control (C2), Joint Task PAGES Force (JTF), Joint Special Operations Task Force (JSOTF), Threat to Homeland, Posse Comitatus 111 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THIS CLASSIFICATION OF OF ABSTRACT REPORT PAGE ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UL NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited COMMAND AND CONTROL OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES MISSIONS IN THE US NORTHERN COMMAND AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY Otis W. McGregor III Lieutenant Colonel, United States Army B.S., Texas A&M University, 1987 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN SECURITY STUDIES (HOMELAND SECURITY AND DEFENSE) from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL March 2005 Author: Otis W. McGregor III Approved by: Christopher Bellavita Thesis Advisor Robert Simeral Second Reader/ CAPT (Ret) Douglas Porch Chairman, Department of National Security Affairs iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv ABSTRACT The need for a well thought out, planned, and rehearsed command and control organization to conduct special operations in the US Northern Command Area of Responsibility is vital to success in defending the Homeland. Currently, USNORTHCOM does not have an apportioned or assigned command and control structure for the conduct of special operations. This thesis analyzes three courses of action to fulfill this requirement: use the current USNORTHCOM battle staff command structure including the integration of the Standing Joint Force Headquarters-North; rely on the newly formed US Special Operations Command’s Joint Task Force Structures; and establish a Theater Special Operations Command North assigned to USNORTHCOM. Through the conduct of analysis and research this thesis recommends that The Joint Staff direct the reorganization required to establish a Theater Special Operations Command North to exercise command and control of special operations forces conducting operations in the USNORTHCOM AOR. v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 A. HOMELAND DEFENSE VIGNETTE..........................................................2 B. IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM..................................................................3 C. BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................7 1. Desert One ............................................................................................7 2. Holloway Commission .........................................................................9 3. Goldwater-Nichols Defense Act........................................................10 4. USSOCOM Organization..................................................................12 D. SPECIAL OPERATIONS MISSIONS ........................................................14 E. US NORTHERN COMMAND MISSIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES....................................................................................17 F. THESIS CONSTRUCT.................................................................................20 II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHODOLOGY..............................................23 A. RESEARCH QUESTION .............................................................................23 B. DISCUSSION .................................................................................................24 1. The Theory and Doctrine of Special Operations ............................25 2. The Theory and Doctrine of Homeland Security............................26 3. America's Historical Experience with Special Operations and Homeland Security.............................................................................27 4. The Spectrum of Threats USNORTHCOM Can Expect to Face..29 5. The Strategic and Political Environment in Which USNORTHCOM Operates ...............................................................31 C. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................33 1. Eliminated Courses of Action ...........................................................33 2. Missions in the USNORTHCOM AOR............................................35 3. Attribute Definitions..........................................................................35 a. Responsiveness........................................................................35 b. Continuity of C2......................................................................36 c. Knowledge of the AOR............................................................36 d. Manpower Cost .......................................................................37 e. SOF Ability to Operate and Integrate with Interagency .......37 4. Conduct of Analysis of Courses of Action .......................................38 III. ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................39 A. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................39 B. THREATS TO THE HOMELAND .............................................................40 C. MISSIONS......................................................................................................43 1. Homeland Security and Homeland Defense....................................43 2. USNORTHCOM Missions ................................................................46 3. USNORTHCOM Special Operations Missions...............................49 D. COURSE OF ACTION DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS......................52 1. USNORTHCOM Adaptive Joint Force Headquarters ..................52 vii 2. USNORTHCOM Adaptive Joint Force Headquarters Comparison to Attributes..................................................................56 a. Responsiveness........................................................................56 b. Continuity of C2......................................................................57
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Demilitarization of the Siachen Conflict Zone: Concepts for Implementation and Monitoring
    SANDIA REPORT SAND2007-5670 Unlimited Release Printed September 2007 Demilitarization of the Siachen Conflict Zone: Concepts for Implementation and Monitoring Brigadier (ret.) Asad Hakeem Pakistan Army Brigadier (ret.) Gurmeet Kanwal Indian Army with Michael Vannoni and Gaurav Rajen Sandia National Laboratories Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and Livermore, California 94550 Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited. Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America.
    [Show full text]
  • Realignment and Indian Air Power Doctrine
    Realignment and Indian Airpower Doctrine Challenges in an Evolving Strategic Context Dr. Christina Goulter Prof. Harsh Pant Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government. This article may be reproduced in whole or in part without permission. If it is reproduced, the Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs requests a courtesy line. ith a shift in the balance of power in the Far East, as well as multiple chal- Wlenges in the wider international security environment, several nations in the Indo-Pacific region have undergone significant changes in their defense pos- tures. This is particularly the case with India, which has gone from a regional, largely Pakistan-focused, perspective to one involving global influence and power projection. This has presented ramifications for all the Indian armed services, but especially the Indian Air Force (IAF). Over the last decade, the IAF has been trans- forming itself from a principally army-support instrument to a broad spectrum air force, and this prompted a radical revision of Indian aipower doctrine in 2012. It is akin to Western airpower thought, but much of the latest doctrine is indigenous and demonstrates some unique conceptual work, not least in the way maritime air- power is used to protect Indian territories in the Indian Ocean and safeguard sea lines of communication. Because of this, it is starting to have traction in Anglo- American defense circles.1 The current Indian emphases on strategic reach and con- ventional deterrence have been prompted by other events as well, not least the 1999 Kargil conflict between India and Pakistan, which demonstrated that India lacked a balanced defense apparatus.
    [Show full text]
  • Sapta Shakti Command Forever Victorious
    No. 03/2019 AN INDIAN ARMY PUBLICATION March 2019 SAPTA SHAKTI COMMAND FOREVER VICTORIOUS OP THUNDERBOLT (op viJAY 1999) Captain Haneef Uddin, Vir Chakra, 11 Rajputana Rifl es Operation THUNDERBOLT was launched in June 1999 in the Siachen Sector as part of Operation VIJAY. As was the case in Kargil, Dras and Batalik Sectors, Pakistan occupied unheld heights on the Sangarh Ridge with an aim to alter the Line of Control and threaten Turtuk Sector. A company of 11 RAJ RIF was deployed in Operation THUNDERBOLT at an altitude of 18,000 feet in the Turtuk region. Th eir mission was to capture a position in the region which would facilitate the Army to monitor the movements of the enemy troops better. Captain Haneef Uddin volunteered to lead the special mission patrol consisting of one Junior Commissioned Offi cer and three other ranks. Th e party made valiant endeavours to occupy the position on night of 04 and 05 June 1999. On 06 June 1999, advancing in sub-zero temperatures along the razor sharp edge from the South-Westerly direction, the party came as close as 200 meters of the position when it was fi red upon. Captain Haneef Uddin and two other ranks received the brunt of fi re. Inspite of the grave injury, Captain Haneef Uddin, without caring for his personal safety, took position and started fi ring to pin down the enemy to extricate his team members. In the ensuing fi ring from both sides, Captain Haneef Uddin was further hit by enemy artillery and small arms fi re.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Command India History & Personnel
    2020 www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk Author: Robert PALMER, M.A. CENTRAL COMMAND, INDIA (HISTORY & PERSONNEL) A short history of Central Command, India between 1942 and 1946, and details of the key appointments held in Central Command within that period. Copyright ©www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk (2020) 24 September 2020 [CENTRAL COMMAND INDIA HISTORY & PERSONNEL] A Concise History of Central Command, India. Version: 1_1 This edition dated: 24 September 2020 ISBN: Not yet allocated. All rights reserved. No part of the publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means including; electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, scanning without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Author: Robert PALMER, M.A. (copyright held by author) Assisted by: Stephen HEAL Published privately by: The Author – Publishing as: www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk © www.BritishMilitaryH istory.co.uk Page 1 24 September 2020 [CENTRAL COMMAND INDIA HISTORY & PERSONNEL] Central Command, India With the outbreak of war with Japan in December 1941, and the loss of Burma, the threat of invasion by Japanese forces increased significantly. The Commander-in-Chief of The Army in India, General WAVELL, restructured the Indian Army to meet this threat. Eastern Command and Southern Command become the Eastern Army and Southern Army respectively, giving them an operational role. At the same time, Northern Command became the North Western Army on a similar basis, with its main role remaining control of the North-West Frontier with Afghanistan and Iran. A new command, called Central Command, came into being in May 1942 to focus on internal security within central India.
    [Show full text]
  • Ceasefire Violations in Jammu and Kashmir a Line on Fire
    [PEACEW RKS [ CEASEFIRE VIOLATIONS IN JAMMU AND KASHMIR A LINE ON FIRE Happymon Jacob ABOUT THE REPORT Ceasefire violations along the Line of Control and international border between India and Pakistan have over the last decade been the primary trigger of tensions and conflict between New Delhi and Islamabad in the long-disputed Kashmir region. This report, supported by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and based on extensive field visits to the border areas, in-depth interviews with Indian and Pakistani military officials, and several primary datasets explains the factors behind the violations and suggests ways to control them within the context of the broader bilateral political dispute. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Happymon Jacob is associate professor of diplomacy and disarmament studies at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He has previously worked with the Observer Research Foundation (New Delhi), University of Jammu (J&K), Central European University (Budapest), and the Jamia Millia Islamia University (New Delhi), has participated in or organized some of the influential India-Pakistan Track II dialogues, and has written extensively on India’s foreign policy, the Kashmir conflict, India-Pakistan relations, and security issues in South Asia. Cover photo: Hindustan Times/Getty Images The views expressed in this report are those of the author(s) alone. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Institute of Peace. United States Institute of Peace 2301 Constitution Ave., NW Washington, DC 20037 Phone: 202.457.1700 Fax: 202.429.6063 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.usip.org Peaceworks No.
    [Show full text]
  • Rape in Kashmir
    Vol. 5, Issue 9 RAPE IN KASHMIR A Crime of War Asia Watch & Physicians for Human Rights A Division of Human Rights Watch Asia Watch Physicians for Human Rights 485 Fifth Avenue 1522 K Street NW, # 910 100 Boylston Street # 702 New York NY 10017 Washington DC 20005 Boston MA 02116 Tel. (212) 972-8400 Tel. (202) 371-6592 Tel. (617) 695-0041 Fax (212) 972-0905 Fax (202) 371-0124 Fax (617) 695-0307 I. Introduction Since January 1990, the north Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir has been the site of a brutal conflict between Indian security forces and armed Muslim insurgents demanding independence or accession to Pakistan. In its efforts to crush the militant movement, India's central government has pursued a policy of repression in Kashmir which has resulted in massive human rights violations by Indian army and paramilitary forces. Throughout the conflict, the security forces have deliberately targeted civilians, the majority of whom are widely believed to sympathize with the militants.1 Indian security forces, which include the army and two paramilitary forces, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and the Border Security Force (BSF) have assaulted civilians during search operations, tortured and summarily executed detainees in custody and murdered civilians in reprisal attacks.2 In October 1992, representatives from Asia Watch and Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) traveled to Kashmir to document rape and other human rights abuses and violations of the laws of war by Indian security forces. They also investigated incidents of abuse by armed militant groups who have also committed rape and other attacks on civilians.
    [Show full text]
  • Armed Forces Module - II Structure and Role of the Forces
    Armed Forces Module - II Structure and Role of the Forces 4 Note ARMED FORCES The soldiers are faced with a variety of challenges including the difficult areas like icy glaciers, sandy deserts, mountainous jungles and the vast seas. They willingly face these challenges and are prepared to make any sacrifice for the Nation. The values of comradeship and brotherhood pervade all ranks of the army. The soldiers lay down their lives for the three Ns - Naam (name or honour), Namak (loyalty to the Nation) and Nishan (insignia or flag of the unit/regiment or Nation). They exhibit valour when fighting the enemy. There is no discrimination on the basis of caste, religion or any other aspect. This ensures team spirit and unity. They usually choose death over dishonour. The forthrightness, integrity and dignity forms the ethos of every soldier. In this lesson we shall learn about the different Commands of the Indian Army in greater detail as well as the Ethos of the armed forces. Before we look at the organisational structure we shall examine the ethos of the Indian Army. Objectives After studying this lesson, you will be able to: • explain the role and organisational structure of Indian Army; • describe the role and structure of Indian Navy and • explain the role and organisational structure of Air Force. 4.1 Role of the Indian Army The Indian Army mainly has the task to protect the territorial integrity of our country and safeguard its sovereignty from external aggression or internal disorder. The army also provides assistance to the civil administration in the event of a natural or manmade disaster.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 15425808W Hav P Surendra 371 Field Hospital C/O 99 APO
    1 IN THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL REGIONAL BENCH, GUWAHATI. O.A. No. 08/2016 PRESENT HON`BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY, OFFICIATING CHAIRPERSON HON`BLE LT GEN SANJIV LANGER, MEMBER (A) No. 15425808W Hav P Surendra 371 Field Hospital C/o 99 APO ……Applicant. By legal practitioners for Applicant. Mr. Diganta Gogoi, Mrs. Simi Das, Ms Monjula Baruah -Versus- 1. Union of India, represented by the Secretary Ministry of Defence, South Block New Delhi-110011 2. Chief of Army Staff South Block, IHQ of MoD (Army) New Delhi-110001 3. Director General of Armed Forces Medical Services, ‘M’ Block Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001 4. Army Medical Corps Record Office PIN-900450, C/o 56 APO 5. 48 FHO C/o 56 APO ……Respondents By legal practitioners for Respondents. Mr. N. Baruah, CGSC. 2 Date of hearing : 14.12.2016 Date of order : 14.12.2016 ORDER (ORAL) (Per B.P. Katakey, Officiating Chairperson) 1. Heard Mr. Diganta Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Mr. N. Baruah, learned CGSC assisted by Col Anand, OIC, Legal Cell, AFT, Guwahati appearing for the respondents. 2. The applicant, who is presently serving in the rank of Havildar, has filed this OA challenging the CR for the period 01.07.2011 to 12.11.2011 and also the communication dated 12.10.2015 whereby and whereunder, the applicant has been informed about rejection of his statutory complaint, contending inter-alia that since the procedure required to be followed in writing the CR and also the communication of the adverse entry has not been followed, the said CR needs to be interfered with, more so, when the same come in the way of the applicant’s promotion from the LNK to Havildar.
    [Show full text]
  • 3086 SUPPLEMENT to the LONDON GAZETTE, N MAY, 1937
    3086 SUPPLEMENT TO THE LONDON GAZETTE, n MAY, 1937 To be Additional Commanders of the Military Major Cornelius George Burt, Officer Com- Division of the said Most Excellent Order:— manding-Field Company, Singapore Royal Colonel Hugh Scott Barrett, O.B.E., T.D., Engineers (Volunteers), Straits Settlements late Extra Regimentally Employed List, Volunteer Force. Officer in Charge (Military Deputy of the Major George Cam, Royal Engineers (Indian Judge Advocate General), Military and Air . Army), Assistant Commander Royal Force Department, Office of the Judge Advo- Engineers (E. & M.), Bombay District, cate General of the Forces. Southern Command, India. Colonel (honorary Brigadier) Edwin John Lieutenant-Colonel and Brevet-Colonel James Britton, D.S.O., M.I.Mech.E., Re-, Alexander Thomas Cannon, T.D., 3ist (City tired pay, late Royal Army Ordnance Corps, . of London Rifles) Anti-Aircraft Battalion, late Principal Ordnance Mechanical Engineer, Royal Engineers, Territorial Army. War Office. Major (Quarter-Master) Reginald Henry Coad, : M.M., " Special List " of Quarter-Masters of Colonel William Cave-Browne, p.S.O., M.C., the Indian Army, loth Battalion, 5th late Royal Engineers, Chief Engineer, Mahratta Light Infantry, Indian Army. Malaya. Major (Quarter-Master) William . James Colonel John Eric Chippindall, M.C., late Coombes, M.B.E., Royal Artillery. Royal Engineers, Chief Engineer, Iraq. Major (local Lieutenant-Colonel) Matthew Lieutenant-Colonel and Brevet Colonel Vere Henry Cox, M.C., M.I.Mecti.E., Royal Egerton Cotton, O.B.E., T.D., Territorial Indian Army Service Corps, Officer Com- Army Reserve of Officers, late Commanding manding, Heavy Repair Shop (Mechanical 59th (4th West Lancashire) Medium Brigade Transport), Chaklala, India.
    [Show full text]
  • Building-A-Viable-Indian-Defense-Viz
    Image Courtesy: mynation.com C3S Issue Map IV Building a Viable Indian Defense viz. China: An Analysis of the Integrated Theatre Commands Tanvir Jaikishen Member, Chennai Centre for China Studies (C3S) S e p t e m b e r 1 9 2 0 1 9 About the Author Tanvir Jaikishen is a consultant and entrepreneur. He holds a master's degree from the London School of Economics and Political Science in International Health Policy. His passions include the study of International Relations, Geopolitics, Defense and Greco- Roman history. He is Member, C3S. About C3S The Chennai Centre for China Studies (C3S), registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 (83/2008 dated 4th April 2008), is a non-profit public policy think tank. We carry out in depth studies of developments relating to China with priority to issues of interest to India such as geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics of India- China relations, Chinas internal dynamics, border issues, Chinas relations with South Asian countries, prospects of trade, the evolution of Chinese politics and its impact on India and the world, ASEAN and SAARC relations, cultural links, etc. C3S attempts to provide a forum for dialogue with China scholars in India and abroad and give space for the expression of alternate opinions on China related topics. We also provide a database for research on China with special attention to information available in Chinese language. Additionally, events, lecture discussions and seminars are organised on topics of current interest. What is an Issue Map? C3S has launched its Issue Map initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH REGIONAL BENCH at CHANDIMANDIR -.- OA 1890 of 2011
    OA No. 1890 of 2011 --1- ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH REGIONAL BENCH AT CHANDIMANDIR -.- OA 1890 of 2011 Mohinder Singh …… Petitioner(s) Vs Union of India and others …… Respondent(s) -.- Coram: Justice Rajesh Chandra, Judicial Member. Air Marshal (Retd) SC Mukul, Administrative Member. -.- For the Petitioner (s) : Mr. Surinder Sheoran, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr.Rajesh Sehgal, CGC. -.- JUDGMENT 11.02.2013 1. By this petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs: (i) For quashing the impugned letter dated 11.10.2011 (Annexure A-5) vide which the claim for promotion to the rank of Subedar Major of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondents. (ii) For conducting a proper DPC to consider the name of the petitioner for promotion to the rank of Subedar Major as per his seniority. (iii) Directions for reinstatement of the petitioner by granting ante date seniority in the rank of Subedar Major with all consequential benefits as per his seniority and (iv) To grant 18% annual interest on the amount due to the petitioner from the date of his seniority till final payment. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was enrolled in the Army on 6.8.1981 and promoted to the rank of Naib Subedar w.e.f. 1.9.2000 and further promoted to the rank of Subedar w.e.f. 1.2.2008. Due to non consideration for promotion to the rank of Sub Maj by the DPCs held in 2010 and 2011 he was retired from service w.e.f. 31.8.2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Mand, Africa Command, and Joint Forces Command
    i [H.A.S.C. No. 111–24] SECURITY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY OF THE U.S. SOUTHERN COMMAND, NORTHERN COM- MAND, AFRICA COMMAND, AND JOINT FORCES COMMAND COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION HEARING HELD MARCH 18, 2009 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 53–207 WASHINGTON : 2010 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS IKE SKELTON, Missouri, Chairman JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, California NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii MAC THORNBERRY, Texas SILVESTRE REYES, Texas WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina VIC SNYDER, Arkansas W. TODD AKIN, Missouri ADAM SMITH, Washington J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia LORETTA SANCHEZ, California JEFF MILLER, Florida MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina JOE WILSON, South Carolina ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania ROB BISHOP, Utah ROBERT ANDREWS, New Jersey MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio SUSAN A. DAVIS, California JOHN KLINE, Minnesota JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island MIKE ROGERS, Alabama RICK LARSEN, Washington TRENT FRANKS, Arizona JIM COOPER, Tennessee BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania JIM MARSHALL, Georgia CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania ROB WITTMAN, Virginia HANK JOHNSON, Georgia MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire DUNCAN HUNTER, California JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut JOHN C.
    [Show full text]