Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: armed forces tribunal act 2007 section 4 establishment of armed forces tribunal Page 15 of about 3,457 results (0.289 seconds)

Amardeep Dabas Vs. Union of India and ors

Court : Delhi

..... etc. (emphasis supplied) 15. while the petitioner has placed reliance on para 38(a), the respondents have relied on para 38(f) afore-noticed both before the armed forces tribunal as well as in the present proceedings. it is noteworthy that sub para (a) only states that censure will be considered only once. the instant case is concerned ..... to the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be removed from service under section 20(3) of the air force act, 1950 read in conjunction with rule 18 of the air force rules, 1969, on account of blameworthiness for the above allegations. the petitioner submitted a preliminary as well as a detailed reply to ..... e) also stipulates that airmen who have incurred any red ink entry in the sheet roll due to lack of integrity, moral turpitude, financial irregularities or such other act of misdemeanour which in the opinion of commanding officer make them unfit for commissioning, shall not be considered for commissioning.25. it is trite that merely because a .....

K Tirupathi Versus the Chief of Army Staff Army Headquarters, Dhpo New ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... challenging the impugned order of the third respondent bearing no.308103/15125820h/cf/28/a dated 24.04.2001 which has subsequently been transferred to this tribunal after the formation of the tribunal under the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 and is re-numbered as ta 40/2009. 2. the facts of the case in brief as per the affidavit filed by the ..... .55 hours ak-47 rifle bearing registered no.tu 3226 butt no.223 was issued to the petitioner, k.thirupathi. even though this tribunal has got a great doubt about the genuineness of daily arms issue register, regarding the supply of ak-47 bearing registered no.3226 butt no.223 to the petitioner, namely, k.thirupathi, if ..... was found guilty and awarded punishment of one year rigorous imprisonment and dismissal from service. the said sentence is under challenge before this tribunal. 7(a) the specific charges levelled against the petitioner under army act section 36(d) is that the petitioner on 04.03.2001 between 05.00 and 06.00 hours, when on sentry duty .....

Group CaptaIn Saji Abraham and Others Vs. Union of India, Represented ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi

..... court in l.chandrakumar's case (supra), in para 93, being general principles are applicable to armed forces tribunal unless it is shown that any contrary provision has been made in the armed forces tribunal act, 2007. the said act of 2007 has no specific provision taking away the power of the armed forces tribunal to strike down a legislation or executive order/policy of the government on the ground of ..... laying down the aforesaid principles. he next contended that the armed forces tribunal act was not established under the aforesaid article 323a nor its provisions are synonymous to the provisions of the administrative tribunals act, 1985. the jurisdiction of the high court with regard to matters cognizable by the central administrative tribunal was completely excluded whereas the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 has not excluded the jurisdiction of the high court .....

Armed Forces Tribunal (Pb) Bar Association and anr Vs. Union of India ...

Court : Delhi

..... the same as in this court and there is no reason to discriminate the personnel of the armed forces vis- -vis their civilian counterparts. attention is drawn to the statement of objects and reasons for the enactment of the armed forces tribunal act to contend that the object was to provide for not only quicker but less expensive justice to ..... the personnel of the armed forces. it is argued that on the contrary, the personnel of the armed forces are being charged five times the fee for redressal of ..... 50/- for service of each of the respondents in excess of five respondents or for execution of processes in respect of an application; (c) rule 56 of the armed forces tribunal (practice) rules, 2009 prescribing a fee of rs.25/- for inspection of records of a decided case, by a party to a case or his legal practitioner .....

Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Union of India and ors

Court : Delhi

..... writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india on the same issue may be barred but not filing an independent petition under section 14 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, which provides the complete mechanism to adjudicate the grievances raised by the petitioner concerning the said two acrs and also the acrs covering the period from ..... code of civil procedure, 1908 will not come in the way of the petitioner to seek his remedy by filing the petition under section 14 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 under which an independent legal remedy was available to him to challenge the correctness and validity of the two acrs for the period 1.9.2002 ..... made by the respondents at a subsequent stage. we also cannot lose sight of the fact that the petition was filed before the learned armed forces tribunal in the year 2013, although the armed forces tribunal had come into being in the year 2008.7. in view of the aforesaid circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with .....

Ghan Shyam Singh Vs. Union of India and anr

Court : Delhi

..... wp(c)no.5888/2001). on coming into force of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, this writ petition was transferred for adjudication to the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi and it came to be registered as t.a.no.39/2010.4. the armed forces tribunal heard the matter and allowed the petition vide ..... its judgment dated 18th february, 2013 setting aside the conviction of the petitioner. so far as consequential relief is concerned, the tribunal ..... would be legally entitled to pension with effect from 2nd august, 1995. we accordingly direct as follows:(i) the direction made by the armed forces tribunal in the order dated 18th february, 2013 to the effect that the petitioner would be entitled to pension only with wp(c) no. .....

Union Of India Vs. Air Commodore Nk Sharma

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... the government and be given an opportunity for consideration by the promotion board constituted under such new policy?. consideration and conclusion13 the preamble to the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 reads- an act to provide for the adjudication or trial by armed forces tribunal of disputes and complaints with respect 13| [civil appeal no.14524 of 2015]. to commission, appointments, enrolment and conditions of service in respect of ..... ) adm/lgl respondent(s) judgment sanjay karol j., 1. this civil appeal, under section 31(1)1 of the armed forces tribunal act, 20072 at the instance of the union of india, is directed against the judgment and order dated 30th november 2015, passed by the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi in original application no.537 of 2014. 131. leave to appeal. (1) an appeal .....

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs. Flag officer Commanding and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... identity of the appellants in the test identification parade ought not to have been disbelieved by the tribunal. in exercise of power under section 30 of the armed forces tribunal act, this court normally does not re-appreciate the evidence and slow to interfere with the findings of the tribunal unless there is substantial question of public importance. but when it is found that appreciation of ..... evidence in a given case is vitiated by serious error, this court can re- appreciate the evidence and interfere with the findings. in our view, the tribunal .....

Major S. Ravi and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(5)ALD839; 2001(6)ALT202; 93(2001)DLT647

..... elaborate discussion vide its dated 7-1-1991 held that the survey of india cannot be held to be an armed force of the union and the finding to the contrary of the central administrative tribunal of hyderabad bench is not correct. it further held that even through the army engineers seconded permanently or otherwise ..... to that organisation continue to be members of the armed force so long asthey are governed by the army act, the civilian employees unless drafted for active ..... petitioners are working in survey of india and continued to be members of the armed forces.7. this controversy, in my considered view, is no more res integra having regard to the above submissions and the unchallenged finding of the central administrative tribunal, bangalore bench. therefore, i have no hesitation in holding that the writ .....

Tham Bahadur Gaurang and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1984)1GLR429

..... , which confers the powers of superintendence over all courts by the high court, expressly excludes from the operation of this article, courts, and tribunals constituted by or under any law relating to the armed forces. unless the order of detention could be shown non-est the high court, cannot interfere with the detention. the high court, in habeas ..... be referable to an entry in the relevant list. entry 2 in list i: naval. military and, air force and any other armed forces of the union, would enable parliament to enact the army act and armed with this power the act was enacted in july, 1950. it has to be enacted by the parliament subject to the requirements of part ..... central government may restrict the fundamental rights under clauses (a), (b) and (c) of article 19(1), of any person subject to the army act, every such person being clearly a member of the armed forces. the extent to which restricts may be imposed on the fundamental rights under clauses (a), (b) and (c) of article 19(1) is .....