Court : Supreme Court of India
..... discharge/dismissal also failed whereupon the appellants preferred original applications before the armed forces tribunal. the original applications were dismissed by the tribunal and so were the review petitions.12. the appellants have thus preferred these appeals under section 31 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 before this court inter alia contending that the appellants were ..... 5 (2017) 4 scc60915 dated 9.5.2013 and the judgment(s) and order(s) dated 06.03.2014 and 18.11.2015 passed by the armed forces tribunal. the appellants shall be reinstated with all consequential benefits.28. the appeals are allowed as aforesaid with no order as to costs. .. j.(bela m ..... of by this common judgment. 35. in these appeals the challenge is to the common judgment and order of the armed forces tribunal1, kochi, dated 6.03.2014, whereby the tribunal has refused to interfere with the discharge certificate, dismissing the appellants from service for adopting fraudulent means. consequently, refusing the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
..... bench to decide as to whether intra court appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent could be included within the meaning of section 34 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 for being transferred to the tribunal. . in the light of above reference, this came up for consideration before the larger bench. we have heard learned counsel, sri pradip tarafdar for the appellant and ..... bench, division bench opined, since union of india had set up a tribunal to deal with disputes including service matters pertaining to armed forces personnel, in the light of section 34 of the armed forces tribunal act of 2007 (for short hereinafter referred to as aft act of 2007), whether the matter needs to be transferred to armed force tribunal or could be decided by this court. in this regard, the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... error in the re-engagement of the appellant for 2 years with an option for further re-engagement. the appellant filed an application under section 31 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 seeking leave to appeal to the supreme court which was rejected on 04.02.2013. aggrieved by the said order dated 04.02.2013, the appellant ..... sought a direction to the respondents to approve his re-engagement for 5 years. by an order dated 04.02.2013, the armed forces tribunal dismissed o.a. no.11 of 2012. it was held by the armed forces tribunal that re- engagement cannot be claimed as a matter of right and the period of re- engagement was at the discretion of ..... dated 15.02.2012 that the appellant ought to have exercised his option for 2 years re-engagement and sought for further extension later on. the appellant approached the armed forces tribunal, mumbai by filing original application (o.a.) no.11 of 2012 assailing the proceedings dated 15.02.2012 by which his redressal of grievance was rejected. he .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... the service in the year 1980 and that he had filed the original application only in the year 2011 after the lapse of almost 30 years. the tribunal referred to section 22 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2001 stipulating the period of limitation and held that the inordinate delay in the present matter could not be condoned, thereby dismissing the petitioners application by order ..... dated 13th october, 2011..11. it is against the said order of the tribunal that the petitioner has filed the above mentioned writ before this court. the petitioner has .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... on the exercise of the extraordinary powers conferred on the high court under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india. section 14 of the armed force tribunal act 2007 explicitly bars the jurisdiction of only civil courts. there is a plethora of precedents on the issue that even where another high court could more ..... ] in the earlier writ petition and find that the aspect of the non-maintainability of the writ petition in view of the availability of remedy under the armed forces tribunal act 2007, had not been raised therein. it should therefore be treated as being barred by the principles of constructive res judicata so far as the present parties ..... with human rights or with our constitution. we accept that the requirements and necessities of discipline and discretion is in the realm of discretion of the armed forces even it may appear to some to be outdated paranoid or chauvinistic. therefore, we endeavoured to remain true and steadfast to jural discipline even in arriving .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... of lt.general on the basis of the revised quantified policy dated january 04, 2011 the petitioners filed application(s) under section 14 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 before the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi.18. in the application(s) filed, it was contended by the petitioners that the:- action of the special ..... would also result in unnecessary litigation and disquiet in the environment which would be detrimental to the discipline of the armed forces.21. vide two separate judgment(s) dated april 23, 2012, the tribunal had negatived the challenge laid by the petitioners to the proceedings of the special selection board held on january 07, ..... it was opined that the cancellation of proceedings of said board would be an unprecedented stand which would be extremely detrimental to the discipline of the armed forces and credibility of the senior officers of the army.35. thereafter on february 24, 2011 the defence minister approved the promotion of the officers recommended .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
..... petition no.6746 of 1993 was taken up for hearing and when the respondents counsel sought for the transfer of the case to the armed forces tribunal, regional bench, chennai, under section-14 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, the learned single judge, did not accept the said submission of the respondents counsel and passed orders to that effect on ..... the question of validity of the military nursing service ordinance is not necessary to decide in this application. 27. it is made clear from the judgement of the armed forces tribunal, principal bench, new delhi, in t.a.no.38 of 2012 in between jasbir kaur and others vs. union of india, that the officers recruited under ..... in w.p.no.6746 of 1993 and the same was allowed and the learned single judge had passed an order that it need not be transferred to armed forces tribunal, regional bench, chennai, for enquiry. the said order was challenged before the honble division bench of andhra pradesh high court along with an amendment application and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
..... m salahuddeen for the applicant and mr.k.m.jamaludheen for the respondents and perused the record. 2. by the instant o.a under section 14 of the armed forces tribunal act, the applicant has impugned the orders (annexures -a1 and a3) whereby he was denied the disability pension. he has further prayed for the direction to the ..... nexus between the act, omission or commission resulting in an injury to the person and the normal expected standard ..... court considered the relevancy of the finding on the nexus between the act resulting in the injury/disease and the normal expected standard of duties and way of life expected from a member of the armed forces and held as follows: ...the member of the armed forces who is claiming disability pension must be able to show a normal .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... on 10th april 2012, against the judgment passed by this tribunal on 21st july 2010, under rule 18 of the armed forces tribunal rules, 2008. he has also concurrently moved miscellaneous application under section 5 of the limitation act, 1965 read along with section 22 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 for condoning of delay of near about 20 months ..... may be the present military hospital at hissar had not been constructed, but more than adequate, appropriate and modern facilities existed at hissar for treatment of armed forces personnel. also the applicant, would have had to pay a very heavy charges for whatever facilities he availed in town, whereas such facilities, would have ..... on 18th february 2010 by a miscellaneous application moved by the applicant. therefore, the applicant was aware that his case was under active consideration by the tribunal on 18th february 2010. in a short period thereafter the case was heard and decided on 21st july 2010. accordingly it was for the petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... . union of india and ors. passed in o.a. no.55/2012 decided on 17.02.2012, wherein the tribunal has discussed the provision of section 22 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007. 23. on the similar facts, in cases of risaldar ram karan singh vs. union of india decided on ..... 21.09.2011 in t.a. no.229/2009 and rifleman ram bahadur thapa vs. union of india and ors. in o.a. no.176/2011 decided on 19.10.2011, the same view was taken by this tribunal ..... 1. the oa no.68/2010 was filed in the armed forces tribunal on 02.02.2010. 2. vide this petition, the applicant has sought quashing and setting aside of ..... . learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the impugned order dated 31.05.2001 also violates para 424(c) of the regulations for the armed forces, 1983 which reads as under:- rule 424(c): release on medical grounds: (i) an officer who is found by a medical board to .....
Tag this Judgment!