(Order of the Tribunal made by Justice ACA Adityan)
1. During the course of the argument, when the Tribunal exposed it mind after referring to the Judgment of this Tribunal delivered in T.A.No.171 of 2010 relating to the co-accused Mr. R.S.Singh wherein this Tribunal has directed the respondents to conduct denovotrial on the ground that the impugned warrant proceedings under which the punishment of dismissal and Rigorous Imprisonment were awarded to the said co-accused, the mandatory provisions contemplated under Regulations 27 and 29 of the Regulations for the Navy were not followed, the learned Assistant Judge Advocate SLT Chinmay Sharma has come forward, after getting a cue from his higher ups, to make an endorsement as to the effect that since the petitioner has not exhausted his statutory remedy, if he withdraws this petition and approaches the competent authority as per the rules contemplated under Navy Act 1957, the second respondent is ready to modify the sentence of dismissal awarded to the petitioner into that of discharge to enable the petitioner to get his pension since he was due to retire in July 2001. The learned counsel for the petitioner is also amenable for the course suggested by the learned Assistant Judge Advocate SLT Shinmay Sharma and has come forward to withdraw this petition. Necessary endorsement made on the petition before the Tribunal by both sides today.
2. Under such circumstances, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority under Section 163 of the Navy Act 1957. The application under Section 163 of the Navy Act shall be made by the petitioner within a months time from this date. For compliance four months thereafter. If there is any difficulty felt by the petitioner for compliance, he is at liberty to approach this Tribunal for further direction. No costs.