Airing Service Grievances On Social Media While In Uniform Is Serious Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Removal Of Air Force Personnel
The Delhi High Court has upheld the removal of an Indian Air Force airman from service for uploading a social media video while in uniform, holding that public airing of service-related grievances by uniformed personnel amounts to serious misconduct prejudicial to military discipline.
A division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan dismissed a writ petition filed by a former Corporal, challenging an Armed Forces Tribunal order which had upheld his removal from service.
“Public dissemination of service grievances while being in uniform, particularly through social media platforms, carries consequences extending beyond the individual concerned and has the potential to affect discipline, hierarchy, morale and institutional image,” the Court observed.
Petitioner had joined the Indian Air Force in 2011 as an Airman-Communication Technician. In January 2017, he uploaded a video on Facebook, raising grievances regarding alleged disparities between officers and jawans in matters such as rations, uniforms, allowances, travel facilities and social treatment.
Among other allegations, the video claimed that officers received free rations, stitched uniforms and better travel facilities, while jawans were neglected and subjected to discriminatory treatment.
Following a Court of Inquiry, the Air Force issued a show cause notice and eventually passed an order in December 2017 removing him from service under Section 20(3) of the Air Force Act read with Rule 18 of the Air Force Rules.
The authorities found that his actions were prejudicial to service discipline and had tarnished the image of the Indian Air Force.
The Armed Forces Tribunal later upheld the action, observing that the petitioner had bypassed established internal grievance redressal mechanisms and instead chose to publicly disseminate service-related issues through social media.
Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that the punishment was disproportionate, that he was under mental stress due to family circumstances and that principles of natural justice had been violated. He also contended that he was not subjected to Court Martial proceedings.
Rejecting the challenge, the High Court reiterated that the scope of judicial review in matters concerning Armed Forces discipline is extremely limited.
It further noted that the foundational facts were undisputed, since the petitioner himself admitted to recording and uploading the video.
“Despite the existence of established internal mechanisms for redressal of grievances, the Petitioner chose not to avail such channels and instead resorted to public dissemination through social media. Thus, the punishment cannot be said to be so outrageously disproportionate as to shock the conscience of this Court,” the Court said.
It also rejected the argument that absence of Court Martial vitiated the proceedings, observing that the competent authority was entitled to take administrative action after issuance of a show cause notice and consideration of the petitioner's response.
As such, the Court refused to interfere in the matter and dismissed the petition.
Appearance: Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta, Ms. Esha Mehrotra, Ms Devangana Sharma, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr. P. S Singh CGSC, Mr. Rajneesh Kumar Sharma, Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Mr. Aditya Tomar, Mr. Mrityunjay Singh, Ms. Sakshi Raghav G.P, SGT Anil Vashisth for UOI.
Case title: CPL Sachin Kumar Solanki (Retd) v. Union Of India & Ors
Case no.: W.P.(C) 6952/2026