Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: army act 1950 section 10 commission and appointment Court: chennai Page 1 of about 620 results (0.217 seconds)

Capt. N. Gopalakrishnan (Retired) Vs. Union of India, Rep by the Secre ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... retirement, superannuation, termination of service and penal deductions; (iii) summary disposal and trials where the punishment of dismissal is awarded; (iv) any other matter, whatsoever, but, shall not include matters relating to- (i) orders issued under section 18 of the army act, 1950(46 of 1950), sub-section (1) of section 156 of the navy act 1957 (62 of 1957) and section 18 of the air force act 1950 (45 of 1950); and (ii) transfers and postings including the change ..... the point:-no doubt under section 3(o) of the armed forces tribunal act 2007, this tribunal is empowered to take up and decide the service matter, which reads as follows- 3(o) service matters, in relation to the persons subject to the army act 1950 (46 of 1950), the navy act 1957 (62 of 1957) and the air force act 1950 (45 of 1950), mean all matters relating to the conditions of their service and shall include- (i) remuneration (including allowances), pension and other retirement benefits; (ii) tenure, including commission, appointment, enrolment, probation, confirmation, seniority, training, promotion, reversion, premature .....

Harcharan Singh Premi Vs. the Officer Commanding Army, Military Hospit ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1970Mad176

..... the petitioner was appointed as a commissioned officer by the president on 18-2-1967 and was a temporary commissioned officer, the army act, 1950, is applicable to the persons mentioned in section 2 of the act. ..... the petitioner filed a review petition to the director general, armed forces medical service on 7-3-1967 under section 27 of the army act, 1950, and as the petitioner did not receive any immediate redress on his application for review, he submitted a petition on 9-3-1967 to the president of india. ..... the court held that a short service commissioned officer as soon as he takes up the commission will become subject to the provisions of the army act by virtue of section 2(2) and he will remain so subject until he is duly discharged. ..... shortly put, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he being a commissioned officer, is governed by the army act and any dismissal and the termination of his service can only be under section 19 of the act, i. e. ..... if the construction sought to be placed by the learned counsel for the central government is accepted, it would mean that temporary commissioned officers would not be governed by the army act and would not be subject to the discipline under the army act. ..... section 2(1)(a) states that officers, junior commissioned officers and warrant officers of the regular army are persons subject to the act. .....

Harcharan Singh Premi Vs. the Officer Commanding, Army Military Hospit ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1969)2MLJ373

..... the petitioner filed a review petition to the director-general, armed forces medical service on 7th march, 1967 under section 27 of the army act, 1950, and as the petitioner did not receive any immediate redress on his application for review, he submitted a petition on 9th march, 1967 to the president of india. ..... the court held that a short service commissioned officer as soon as he takes up the commission will become subject to the provisions of the army act by virtue of section 2 (2) and he will remain so subject until he is duly discharged. ..... shortly put, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he being a commissioned officer, is governed by the army act and any dismissal and the termination of his service can only be under section 19 of the act, i.e. ..... on behalf of the central government it is submitted that the petitioner was appointed as a commissioned officer under the army instructions and as he was only a temporary commissioned officer, he was governed by army instructions dated 20th october, 1962, paragraph 12, which provides that if an officer, during the probationary period is reported as unsuitable to retain his commission, it will be terminated at any time during or after the probationary period. ..... the petitioner was appointed as a commissioned officer by the president on 18th february, 1967 and was a temporary commissioned officer. .....

Kewal Nath Ram Versus Union of India Rep.by Secretary to Government Mi ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... the honble high court in its order dated 07.04.2008 directed that the said writ petition shall be treated to be a statutory appeal in terms of section 26 of army act 1950 and be decided by the chief of the army staff within a period of two months. ..... 5(a) the point : the admitted case of the petitioner is that he was enrolled as a clerk in the army on 06.07.1984 and appointed as lance naik clerk w.e.f. ..... , the chief of the army staff had issued the following instructions vide integrated head quarters of mod (army) letter no.b/6003/744/ack/jak rif / inf- 6(pers) dated 27.05.2008 and a/00520/prom/inf-6 (pers) dated 16.06.2008 : a) redress be granted to the junior commissioned officer by way of re-fixing his date of seniority in the rank of naik ahead of those who were enrolled at a later date as compared to him without taking into consideration the date of appointment of lance naik. ..... 3(j) with the re-fixation of the seniority of clerical category from the date of enrolment instead from the appointment of lance naik, the previous anomalies in the seniority roll have been removed and there has been no injustice done to the petitioner or any other individual while doing so. ..... , promotion cadre, education standards, non-commissioned clerk course on the date of promotion by the respondents 11 to 13 were granted ante dated seniority vide army head quarter letter no.a/0052/inf 6 (pers) dated 16.06.2008 and para 4 (b) of army instructions 84/68, contrary to the rules for promotion. .....

Sadashiv Gajanana Bhat Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary, Gover ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... section 2 of the army act 1950, reads as follows:- (1) the following persons shall be subject to this act wherever they may be, namely:- (a) officers, junior commissioned officers and warrant officers of the regular army; (b) persons enrolled under this act; (c) persons belonging to the indian reserve forces; (d) persons belonging to the indian supplementary reserve forces when called out for service or when carrying out the annual test; (e) officers of the territorial army, when doing duty as such offices, and enrolled persons of the said army when ..... called out or embodied or attached to any regular forces, subject to such adaptations and modifications as may be made in the application of this act to such persons under sub-section91) of section 9 of the territorial army act, 1948 (56 of 1948); (f) persons holding commissions in the army in indian reserve of officers, when ordered on any duty or service for which they are liable as members of such reserve forces; (g) officers appointed to the indian regular reserve of officers, when ordered on any duty or service for which they are .....

In Re: A.A. Paul

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1974CriLJ375

..... the learned counsel for the accused (revision petitioner) contends that in spite of the accused having retired from army service, he must be deemed to be subject to the army act by virtue of section 123 of the army act and so much so. ..... the learned counsel lays stress on the words 'and tried and punished for such offence as if he continued to be so subject' occurring at the end of sub-section (1) of the above section and contends that because of that provision, it must be deemed that the accused, even though retired from service, is still subject to the provisions of the army act. ..... (sub-sections (3) and (4) omitted)this section is only an enabling provision by which an accused can be tried by a court martial in respect of an offence committed by him when he was subject to the army act. ..... the revision is against the order of the special judge, madras, dismissing a petition purporting to be one under section 251-a of the criminal procedure code and section 126 of the army act. ..... the very words relied on by the learned counsel clearly indicate that the accused contemplated under that section is really not subject to the army act, but the procedure for the trial of such person should be the same as in the case of a person who is still subject to the army act. ..... however, the learned counsel for the accused contends that section 123 of the army act makes a deeming provision, by which the accused, though retired from service, must be held to be still subject to the army act. .....

Rudra Harish Vs. Union of India Represented by Chief of Army Staff and ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... the commanding officer as provided in army act and suitable punishments were awarded to him, details of which are tabulated below:seroffencepunishment awardedrelevant sec of army actprovision under which power exercised by commanding officer(a)osl-103 days28 days riaa sec 39(b)army act sec 80(b)osl-10 days07 days ri and 14 days pay fineaa sec 39(b)army act sec 80(c)osl-15 days07 days riaa sec 39(b)army act sec 80(d)osl-05 days07 days ri and 14 days pay fineaa sec 39(a)army act sec 80 the petitioner was encouraged ..... at all times and was granted his full quota of leave as and when required by him, ..... petitioner mandated stern action, commander, 102 infantry brigade was apprised and the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why should he not be discharged from service for being undesirable in terms of army rule 13 (3) item iii (v) and provisions contained in paras-2 and 5 of army headquarter letter no.13201/1139/ag/ps-2(c), dated 28th december 1988. ..... the petitioner is in consonance with the regulations and rules as enunciated in army law and therefore, the application be dismissed being devoid of .....

A. Chandra Babu Naidu Vs. the General Officer Commanding-in-chief

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... the applicant/appellant, who had faced a charge under section 64(c) of the army act and received a punishment of dismissal at the hands of the summary court martial vide order no.22013/p/621/dv-4, dated 28th october 2010, is standing before ..... his evidence in respect of the present charge under section 64(c) is as to the effect that on 31st october 2008, he was battalion duty junior commissioned officer and at 18.00 hours, he briefed all guards and the adjutant had given him time till 23.30 hours ..... of the weapon to the night sentries, he (p.w.6) sealed the kote at around 19.00 hours on 16th november 2009 and the kote junior commissioned officer and kote non-commissioned officer deposited the weapon at 14.35 hours which were under the custody of guards. ..... around 23.55 hours, she (p.w.8) heard the conversation between commanding officer, subedar major, junior commissioned officer adjutant and the battalion havildar major on radio set and the commanding officer was instructing subedar major to change the accused from guard duty immediately. ..... was examined as p.w.5 before the summary of evidence, in his evidence would depose that he was posted in 528 army service corps battalion since 7th october 2008 and he was performing the duties of kote non-commissioned officer of a company since 15th october 2008. ..... further inquired about the incident with subedar/mechanical transport vc malviya (convoy junior commissioned officer commander), who narrated the incident as to how the accused got detached .....

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

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... march, 2001, the petitioner absented himself from 177 field regiment, until apprehended by the search party of the same unit at 06.30 hours on 5th march, 2001 at guhauti railway station and the last charge under section 52 (a) army act discloses that while absenting himself from his regiment at the place and on the date that is on 4th march, 2001, he committed theft by dishonestly taking with him one rifle ak-47 registered no.tu 3226 butt no.223, ninety rounds ..... impugned proceedings in no.108103/15125620h/cf/28/a dated 24th april 2001, the petitioner has been charged with three offence namely (i) for leaving his post without orders from his superior officer under army act section 36(d) (ii) deserting the services under army act section 38(1) and (iii) committing theft of ak 47 with 3 magazines containing 90 bullets under section 52(a) of the army act. ..... tried for an offence if he dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any such property and as per section 52(c), a person is said to have committed criminal breach of trust in respect of any such property, and as per 52(d) if a person dishonestly receives or retains any such property in respect of which any of the offence under clause (a) (b) (c) has been committed, knowing or having reason to believe the commission of such offence and 52 (e) and (f) are dealing with an offence if a person wilfully destroys or injures any property of the ..... and reasonableness is the hallmark of article 14 of the constitution of idnia, 1950 .....

S. Ramachander Vs. the Union of India, Represented by Chief of Army an ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... on the basis of the above said available documentary and oral evidences and also taking into consideration the previous punishments of 28 days of rigorous imprisonment for an offence under section 39(b) of the army act on 31.05.1993, 28 days of ri for an offence under section 39(b) of army act on 25.09.1998, 89 days of ri for an offence under section 39(b) of army act on 18.03.1999 and 7 days pay fine for an offence under section 63 r/w 48 of army act on 13.07.2004, the impugned order of dismissal from service was passed by the 3rd respondent, which was confirmed by the 2nd respondent/appellate authority on 08.11.2008 ..... now the point for determination in this application is whether the impugned order dated 08.03.2008 of the 3rd respondent dated 08.03.2008 and the impugned order dated 08.11.2008 of the 2nd respondent, resulting the punishment of dismissal from service for an offence under section 39(b) of the army act, are liable to be set aside for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the application/appeal? 8. ..... the short facts of the said case are that the appellant therein joined in the army service on 18.08.1981 and after training in the army as a technician electronic system, he passed the 54th entrance examination for army cadets college from dehra doon in the year 1986 and was to become a commissioned officer and before that could happen, he was posted to ladakh. .....