The Supreme Court has ruled that an Air Force personnel cannot seek a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for joining a civil post after failing to obtain the mandatory prior permission required under Air Force Order (AFO) No. 33/2017. Dismissing the appeal filed by Airman Nakhat Singh, the Court held that the prescribed procedure is not a mere formality but an essential safeguard linked to the operational readiness of the Indian Air Force.
Background of the Case
The appellant, Nakhat Singh, was serving as a Corporal in the Indian Air Force. After completing the minimum seven years of service, he applied for the post of Assistant Professor (Hindi) through the Rajasthan Public Service Commission in 2020.
He successfully cleared the written examination and interview and was selected for appointment. However, after receiving the selection, he sought a No Objection Certificate and discharge from service to join the civil post. The Air Officer Commanding declined to recommend his request because he had not obtained prior permission before applying for the post, as required under Air Force Order No. 33/2017.
The Armed Forces Tribunal rejected his challenge, finding no evidence that he had submitted either an online or offline application seeking prior approval. The Delhi High Court later affirmed the Tribunal's findings, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.
Appellant's Arguments
Before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued that he had already been selected as an Assistant Professor and should not lose that opportunity because of what he described as procedural lapses.
He contended that the requirement of obtaining prior permission before applying for a civil post was only procedural and should be treated as directory rather than mandatory. According to him, the Court should relax the requirement in the interest of justice.
Court's Observations
The Bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar disagreed with the appellant's submissions.
The Court explained that Air Force Order No. 33/2017 was framed to balance the career aspirations of Air Force personnel with the operational requirements of the armed forces. The order requires an Airman to obtain permission before applying for a civil post and later seek an NOC if selected.
Rejecting the argument that these requirements were merely procedural, the Bench observed:
“The prescription of seeking prior permission before making an attempt to apply for a civil post and the subsequent grant of NOC... cannot be stated to be simple procedural requirements that could be dispensed with.”
The Court further noted that the appellant failed to produce any documentary proof showing that he had attempted to obtain prior permission through either the online or offline process. Since both the Armed Forces Tribunal and the Delhi High Court had recorded concurrent findings on this issue, there was no reason for the Supreme Court to interfere.
The Bench also referred to its earlier decision in Amit Kumar Roy v. Union of India, reiterating that members of the Air Force do not possess an unrestricted right to leave service whenever they choose. The judgment emphasized that maintaining adequate manpower and operational preparedness remains a matter of public interest and military discipline.
Decision
The Supreme Court held that compliance with Air Force Order No. 33/2017 is mandatory. Since the appellant had not obtained prior permission before applying for the civil post, he was not entitled to claim an NOC or discharge as a matter of right.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the civil appeal and upheld the decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal and the Delhi High Court, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Case Details
Case Title: Nakhat Singh v. Union of India and Others
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 9050 of 2026
Judge: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Decision Date: July 29, 2026
