ORDER 1. The appellant is a Lieutenant Colonel in the Indian Army. He want before the Allahabad High Court by filing an application under Article. 226 of the Constitution and maintained that the respondents did not give effect to the judgment of this Court dated of August, 1983 in Writ Petition No. 5302 of 1982 wherein this Court had directed:- "We find no substance in any one of the three reasons mentioned by Shri Abdul Khader on behalf of the respondents for the reversion of the petitioner from the rank of Acting Lieutenant Colonel to Major. The reversion or reduction in rank Cannot not be justified and it is accordingly quashed. The petition is directed to be restored to the rank of Acting Lieutenant Colonel with effect from the date he was reverted and stripped of the badges indicating his rank. As a result of the restoration of the rank of the Acting Lieutenant Colonel to the petitioner, other consequences, such as, consideration of the petitioners further claims to advancesent, pay, arrears of pay etc. will have to be considered by the authorities and it is directed that these claims may be considered and disposed of within a period of six months from today. The petitioner will submit all his claims to the appropriate authorities within a period of one month from today........." and claimed confirmation in the rank and further reliefs. 2. Subsequent to the decision of this Court the appellant has again been medically categorised as Shape-II and this categorisation has been Seriously challenged both before the High Court and here. According to the appellant, he was subjected to examination recently and the Army Psychiatrist, on the basis of the past reports and without any independent assessment, has classified him as permanent Shape-II which takes away his chances of confirmation as a full Colonel and of further promotion. 3. In course of hearing of the appeal, we suggested to learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondents to have a fresh psychiatric evaluation of the appellant by a competent body of phychiatrists by including in the board some in-service and retired Army psychiatrists and some from outside. This was initially opposed by learned Additional Solicitor General by Contending that it would be against the discipline of the Defence department and would create an unwholesome precedent. This was initially opposed by learned Additional Solicitor General by Contending that it would be against the discipline of the Defence department and would create an unwholesome precedent. We adjourned the matter and gave him the opportunity to take instructions from Government and we are happy to note that on the basis of instructions, he has agreed, as a special case, to the constitution of such a board of psychiatrists. Appellant has also been heard in person in the matter. He has made written submissions by way of an application which we have taken into consideration. 4. We direct that a board of psychiatrists consisting of three experts be constituted with the Professor and Head of the Psychiatrist wing of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Air Com. K. Sethi Consultant of the Army Hospital at Delhi and Col. M.A, Bhasin, Senior Advisor in Psychiatry, Southern Command Hospital, Pune. The Head of the Department of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, as referred to above shall act as the convenor and chairman of the Board. The Board shall meet at Delhi at such place, date and time as may be fixed by the convenor in consultation with the two other members. The Board shall peruse all the records relevant for the purpose of making psychiatric evaluation" of the appellant and the respondents shall produce all such records as may be necessary and required for such purpose by the Board including the relevant instructions of the Defence Department in the matter of such assessment. The appellant shall appear before the Board when directed and the respondents shall take steps to ensure his availability before the Board. 5. The report should be made available to this Court within six weeks from today. The expenses including payment, if any, necessary to be made to any of the experts shall be borne by respondent No.l. The evaluation shall inter alia indicate whether there was any justification to categorise the appellant as, Shape-II after he had been adjudged as Shape-I and as to whether the present categorisation as Shape-II permanent is justified. 6. We place on record that this shall not be treated as a precedent. For Citation : 1988 (1) JT 256