Srimali Vewnkiteela Vs. Union of India and anr - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1028134
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided OnSep-12-2013
JudgeGITA MITTAL
AppellantSrimali Vewnkiteela
RespondentUnion of India and anr
Excerpt:
$~ 6 * in the high court of delhi at new delhi + % w.p.(c) 6535/2012 date of decision:12. h september, 2013 srimali vewnkiteela through : ..... petitioner mr. sukhjinder singh, adv. versus union of india and anr ..... respondents through : mr. ankur chhibber, adv. coram: hon'ble ms. justice gita mittal hon'ble mr. justice v. kameswar rao gita mittal, j.(oral) 1. by way of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17th august, 2012 passed by the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, delhi rejecting o.a.no.165/2012 on the ground that the tribunal did not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the subject matter of the writ petition.2. as per the impugned order, the petitioner had assailed the communications dated 11th march, 2005, 14th march, 2005, 20th april, 2009, 3rd may, 2010, 25th august, 2010 and 28th february, 2012 issued by the respondents. the tribunal was of the view that communication which was assailed is a matter of policy and that no wp(c) no.6535/2012 page 1 of 7 part of the cause of action had arisen in favour of the petitioner at mumbai where the petitioner was posted.3. during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has placed before us a copy of the communication dated 23rd january, 2013 received by him from the integrated headquarters, ministry of defence (navy) new delhi
Judgment:

$~ 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) 6535/2012 Date of decision:

12. h September, 2013 SRIMALI VEWNKITEELA Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Sukhjinder Singh, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO GITA MITTAL, J.

(Oral) 1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17th August, 2012 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi rejecting O.A.No.165/2012 on the ground that the Tribunal did not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the subject matter of the writ petition.

2. As per the impugned order, the petitioner had assailed the communications dated 11th March, 2005, 14th March, 2005, 20th April, 2009, 3rd May, 2010, 25th August, 2010 and 28th February, 2012 issued by the respondents. The Tribunal was of the view that communication which was assailed is a matter of policy and that no WP(C) No.6535/2012 page 1 of 7 part of the cause of action had arisen in favour of the petitioner at Mumbai where the petitioner was posted.

3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has placed before us a copy of the communication dated 23rd January, 2013 received by him from the Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (Navy) New Delhi