A soldier who challenged the failure of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) to promote him to the rank of sergeant, forcing him to retire from the TT Regiment in August, will be compensated for the unreasonable, irrational, and unlawful decision.
Last week, Justice Devindra Rampersad ordered compensation for Karamchand Badree of $522,240 plus interest.
In the ruling, the judge also quashed the decision by the CDS to discharge Badree and ordered that the necessary decisions should be made to promote him to the rank of sergeant with effect from June 1, 2020.
In his challenge, Badree, who joined the regiment in July 1998, was discharged on August 7, 2020, at the rank of corporal.
During his 22 years in the army, Badree was classified as BE – based everywhere – because of hypertension and this meant he was exempted from practical assessments, but also that in any promotion, BEs’ seniority would be at the bottom of the cadre.
In July 2018, Badree’s lawsuit said he was interviewed and told he had been recommended for promotion.
However, he said he and other BEs were told the regiment intended to implement a new policy for promotions and because of this they had not yet been promoted.
In October 2019, interviews were held with BEs but they were also told the new policy was still being formulated so they might or might not have moved up in the ranks.
Badree’s lawsuit maintained that his promotion was withheld pending the implementation of the new policy and he was discharged on August 7, 2020, at the age of 45.
He also said he found out later that on September 29, 2020, the CDS promoted all BEs except him. Those promoted included those who had been in the 2018 cadre along with him, and their promotion was retroactive from June 1, 2020.
Badree complained that the failure to promote him adversely affected him and denied him benefits and a pension. He also said he was emotionally and psychologically distressed, and had he been promoted, he would have been able to work for two more years. He would even have been eligible for further promotion.
In his ruling, Rampersad said the delay of two years and the failure to ratify the new policy resulted in Badree’s compulsory retirement date arriving, which meant he had to be struck out from the regiment.
“It was only after the claimant retired, a decision was taken to abandon the new policy and apply the established policy to promote other BEs of the claimant’s cadre, excluding the claimant.
“The defendant then refused to retroactively promote the claimant in accordance with its recommendation.”
Rampersad said the CDS’ action in relying on a purported new policy to refuse to promote Badree and then applying the existing policy to promote his peers, after he compulsorily retired, “constituted unfairness amounting to an abuse of power.
“The defendant’s actions infringed the rules of fairness and the principles of natural justice and are therefore unlawful.”
Badree was represented by Michael Rooplal, Kristy Mohan, and Jamie Amanda Maharaj, The CDS was repre
