Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1986)2GLR1038; (1987)ILLJ386Guj
..... central government staff. if the petitioner is treated to be a servant belonging to the armed force of the union, administrative tribunals act, 1985, will not be applicable in view of the provisions under section 2 of administrative tribunals act, 1985. 3. mr. patel, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and also mr. ..... , from the foregoing discussion, it is very clear that the petitioner who belongs to the railway protection force comes under the category of 'an armed force of the union' and as such, the provisions of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, will not be applicable to him. if that be so, there is no question of ..... petitioner herein is a railway servant or a servant belonging to the armed force of the union. if the petitioner belongs to the railway protection force coming under the indian railways act, 1890, naturally, the matter has to be placed before the administrative tribunal constituted for the purpose of dealing with the disputes regarding the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... defence accounts, subroto park, new delhi, respondent no.4 herein.5. aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner had filed the afore-noticed original application before the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi. this petition was taken up for hearing on 20 th november, 2013 and was summarily rejected on the ground that the petitioner was ..... of the petitioner.8. before considering the factual aspect of the matter, we may firstly advert to the rule position. in this regard, rule 6 of the armed forces tribunal (procedure) rule, 2008 is relevant and reads thus: 6. place of filing application (1) an application shall ordinarily be filed by the applicant with the registrar ..... of the chairperson the application may be filed with the registrar of the principal bench and subject to the orders under section 14 or section 15 of the act, such application shall be heard and disposed of by the bench which has jurisdiction over the matter. (2) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... the same was rejected by the respondent no.3 also at delhi.5. aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner had filed the afore-noticed original application before the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi. this petition was taken up for hearing on 20 th november, 2013 and was summarily rejected on the ground that the petitioner ..... case of the petitioner.8. before considering the factual aspect of the matter, we may firstly advert to the rule position. in this regard, rule 6 of the armed forces tribunal (procedure) rule, 2008 is relevant and reads thus: 6. place of filing application (1) an application shall ordinarily be filed by the applicant with the registrar ..... leave of the chairperson the application may be filed with the registrar of the principal bench and subject to the orders under section 14 or section 15 of the act, such application shall be heard and disposed of by the bench which has jurisdiction over the matter. (2) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... the same was rejected by the respondent no.3 also at delhi.5. aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner had filed the afore-noticed original application before the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi. this petition was taken up for hearing on 20 th november, 2013 and was summarily rejected on the ground that the petitioner ..... case of the petitioner.8. before considering the factual aspect of the matter, we may firstly advert to the rule position. in this regard, rule 6 of the armed forces tribunal (procedure) rule, 2008 is relevant and reads thus: 6. place of filing application (1) an application shall ordinarily be filed by the applicant with the registrar ..... leave of the chairperson the application may be filed with the registrar of the principal bench and subject to the orders under section 14 or section 15 of the act, such application shall be heard and disposed of by the bench which has jurisdiction over the matter. (2) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... petitioner. was rejected by the respondent no.3 also at delhi.5. aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner had filed the afore-noticed original application before the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi. this petition was taken up for hearing on 20 th november, 2013 and was summarily rejected on the ground that the petitioner was ..... case of the petitioner.8. before considering the factual aspect of the matter, we may firstly advert to the rule position. in this regard, rule 6 of the armed forces tribunal (procedure) rule, 2008 is relevant and reads thus: 6. place of filing application (1) an application shall ordinarily be filed by the applicant with the registrar ..... of the chairperson the application may be filed with the registrar of the principal bench and subject to the orders under section 14 or section 15 of the act, such application shall be heard and disposed of by the bench which has jurisdiction over the matter. (2) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... 16 may, 2006 chairman, 26 vaisakha, 1928 (saka)standing committee on defence."14. therefore, it is clear from the scheme of the act that jurisdiction of the tribunal constituted under the armed forces tribunal act is in substitution of the jurisdiction of civil court and the high court so far as it relates to suit relating to condition of service ..... the learned senior counsel for the respondent-army personnel.5. for the determination of the present issue it is necessary to refer the relevant provisions of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, the power of the high court under sections 226 and 227 of the constitution, and the power of supreme court under articles 32 and 136 ..... of the writ petition on the ground that against the orders impugned a remedy of appeal to the supreme court is provided under section 30 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007.3. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the union of india submitted that the high court cannot entertain writ petitions under article 226 of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... that the additional vacancies so created are allocated to all the three streams on a pro rata basis. the present appeal under section 31 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 calls in question the correctness of the judgment and order as already noticed above.10. we have heard learned counsel for the parties at ..... . faran sidiqui & ors. respondents judgment t.s. thakur, cji.1. these appeals under section 31 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 are directed against a judgment and order dated 2nd march, 2015 passed by the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi, whereby original application no.430/2012 filed by the respondents has been allowed and policy ..... or the command exit model for allocation of vacancies was discriminatory and/or arbitrary was stoutly denied.9. by its order dated 2nd march, 2015 the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi has allowed the original application(s) filed by the respondents and quashed government of india policy dated 21st january, 2009 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... states, he may, in time of war, establish and prescribe the jurisdiction and procedure of military commissions, and of tribunals in the nature of such commissions, in territory occupied by armed forces of the united states. his authority to do this sometimes survives cessation of hostilities. [ footnote 12 ] the president ..... persons accompanying or serving with the armies of the united states without the territorial jurisdiction of the united states. . . ." [ footnote 18 ] the 1916 act also increased the nonmilitary offenses for which civilian offenders could be tried by courts-martial. [ footnote 19 ] article 15, however, completely disposes of that contention. ..... september 21, 1949, the occupation statute had taken effect. under it, the president vested the authority of the united states military government in a civilian acting as the united states high commissioner for germany. he gave that commissioner "authority, under the immediate supervision of the secretary of state (subject, page .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... demitting office on the 23rd of february 2011. therefore, on the 23rd of february 2011, he had filed a petition being o.a.no.81/2011 before the armed forces tribunal under section 14 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 for quashing the order directing him to demit office in the afternoon of 23rd february, 2011 as he has attained the age of superannuation. lieutenant general ..... of administrative discretion by the respondents. it is also necessary to bear in mind that this court is considering a challenge to an order passed by the armed forces tribunal in exercise of its jurisdiction under the armed forces tribunal act, therefore, exercise of statutory discretion. in this regard, reference requires to be made to binding judicial pronouncements of the supreme court of india which would guide .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
..... also be appointed as a judicial member. the chairman and members of the armed forces tribunal are appointed by the president in consultation with the chief justice of india. so, the armed forces tribunal is a national tribunal. its principal bench is at delhi and have benches at different places. 44. chapter iii of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 consisting of sections 14 to 20, deals with the jurisdiction, powers ..... and authority of the tribunal. section 14(1) reads as follows: "14. jurisdiction, powers and authority in .....
Tag this Judgment!