Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: army act 1950 section 10 commission and appointment Page 7 of about 18,699 results (0.516 seconds)

Major Anurag Pathak Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2007(3)ALLMR228

..... the certificate was not prepared by the petitioner and in routine course it was prepared by his subordinates and he signed the same when it was placed before him.section 57(a) of the army act, 1950 reads as under:57. ..... under sections 52(f) and 57(a) of the army act, 1950 on 11/8/1998 and on the same day after hearing, he was sentenced to be dismissed from service. ..... thereafter in march 1998 a court martial was ordered against him and charges were framed on 18/7/1998 for the offences under sections 52(f) and 57(a) of the army act, 1950. ..... we, therefore, hold that the first charge regarding offence under section 52(f) of the army act as levelled against the petitioner has not been proved by the prosecution before the general court martial and, therefore, the conviction of the petitioner for the said charge cannot be upheld.13. ..... the impugned order of conviction passed by the confirming authority on 16th february 1999 for charge under section 57(a) is hereby confirmed and we award the punishment of severe reprimand to the petitioner under section 71(i) of the army act for the said charge.14. ..... the petitioner is acquitted of the charge regarding offence under section 52(f) of the army act and the order of conviction and sentence on the said charge is hereby quashed and set aside. ..... we, therefore, uphold the findings of the court martial and as confirmed by the general officer commanding-in-chief that the charge under section 57(a) of the army act was duly proved against the petitioner.6. .....

Union of India and anr. Vs. P.D. Yadav

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2001IXAD(SC)30; [2001(91)FLR961]; JT2001(8)SC617; 2001LabIC4014; 2001(7)SCALE270; (2002)1SCC405; 2001(4)SCT1002(SC); 2002(1)SLJ299(SC); (2002)1UPLBEC118

..... 553 of 1972 decided on november 22, 1978] were that a general court martial tried the petitoner and imposed a punishment of cashiering under section 71(d) of the army act and no further punishment was imposed under section 71(h) of the army act for forfeiture of service for the purpose of increased pay, pension or any other prescribed purpose; he applied for grant of pensionary benefits; the authorities did not respond; hence, he filed writ petiton seeking direction to the authorities for granting gratuity and pension due. ..... the high court in the impugned judgments has held that regulation 16(a) is not inconsistent with section 71(h) and (k) of the army act and that they cover different fields: so also regulation 16(a) and rules 14(5) and 15 of the army rules operate in different fields. ..... the high court committed an error in stating that the authorities did not consider in forfeiting pension, partly or fully, that the services of the respondents up to the date of commission of offences were satisfactory and that the court martial did not inflict the punishment of forfeiture of services. 4. ..... we notice the relevant provisions of the acts and regulations:-the army act 1950 '71. .....

Lt. Col. S.K. Kashyap and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1971SC1120; 1971CriLJ832; (1971)2SCC126; [1971]3SCR881; 1971(4)WLN23

..... state of rajasthan made an application before the special judge that under section 122 of the army act, 1950 a period of three years was provided after which no court martial proceedings could be commenced against the army officers and the period of limitation was to be computed from the date ..... commanding gave notice that the four officers meaning thereby the appellants belonged to his unit and that the appellants would be tried by court martial under the army act, 1950 for the offences alleged to have been committed by them as set out in the notice of the special judge and that the court of the special judge was requested jo stay the proceedings against the ..... on 13 september, 1966 before the special judge that they were commissioned officers of the indian army and without complying with the provisions of section 549 of the crpc and the rules thereunder called the 'criminal courts and court martial (adjustment of jurisdiction) rules,' the special judge could not proceed against the appellants in the criminal court which under the army act is described as a civil court as opposed to court martial ..... special judge was appointed until 26 september, 1962 and the trial also came to an end on 26 september, 1962 this court did not accept that contention because the accused was not called upon his defence on 28 july, 1962 and the examination of the accused under section 342 of the crpc took place after that date and the accused filed his written statement on 14 august, 1952 and the addresses .....

Harikishan Vs. Union of India, Service Through the Secretary Deptt. of ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata

..... 29.8.2000 the petitioner filed an application under section 164 and 165 of the army act 1950 before the chief of the army staff, new delhi. ..... admittedly the accused / applicant faced summary court martial on the charge under section 39 (a) of t he army act on the allegations that he absented himself without leave from unit line from 17.00 hrs to ..... the accused has claimed that the provision of section 131 of the army act regarding the taking of oath or affirmation in the prescribed manner was ..... such question of following the provision of section 131 of the army act of that chapter does not arise at ..... it appears from section 120(4) of the army act that the presiding officer in a summary court martial may pass any sentence which may be passed under this act, except a sentence of death or transportation or of imprisonment for a term exceeding the limit specified in sub-section (5). ..... on the contrary if we look into section 116 of the army act then it will appear that it has been laid down therein to the effect ..... he has further contended therein that mandatory provision as laid down in the army act and rules were not followed by the presiding officer while holding summary court martial ..... section 71 of the army act has clearly provided that a presiding officer of a court martial proceeding can pass sentence of dismissal from ..... shall be attended throughout by two other persons who shall be officers or junior commissioned officers or one of either, and who shall not as such, be sworn or affirmed. .....

J.K. Ojha Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(1)MPHT52; 2002(2)MPLJ78

..... warrants/accountable forms held on the charge of his unit well knowing that the concession voucher book (iaft-1720a) bearing machine number from 91l 812100 had been lost by him.third charge : army act, section 63 : an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline.in that he,at field, on 27 march, 2000, when examined as a witness at summary of evidence in respect of ic-46907m captain rajdeep thapa improperly stated that the loss of concession voucher book first came to his knowledge ..... the second charge is under section 57(d) of army act and third charge relates to the violation of section 63 of the army act. ..... 'in that he,at chandigarh, between 10th may, 97 and 25th may, 97, while performing the duties of officer commanding, 342 coy asc (sup) type 'b', which came to knowledge of authority competent to initiate action on 13 october, 1998, was found deficient of concession voucher book (iaft-1720a) containing one hundred forms bearing machine number 91l-812100, the property of the government entrusted to him.second charge: army act, section 57(d): where it was his officialduty to make a declaration respecting a matter knowingly ..... the charges which are levelled against the petitioner in the undergoing disciplinary enquiry are quoted below:--first charge: army act, section 54(b): losing by neglect concession voucher book (iaft-1720a). ..... the second charge sheet which has been issued to the petitioner contains the first charge under section 54(b) of army act. .....

Union of India and anr. Vs. Charanjit S. Gill and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2000SC3425; JT2000(5)SC135; 2000(4)SCALE221; (2000)5SCC742; 2000(2)LC1317(SC); (2000)2UPLBEC1642

..... 1 in his affidavit has submitted that the notes under sections and rules as are found under various provisions of law compiled by the army authorities in the manual of military law do not form part of the army act, 1950 and army rules, 1954. ..... goc, ba had no jurisdiction to either convene the gcm vide his order dated 23rd december, 1991 or to pass the order dated 2nd may, 1992 as he was neither a properly appointed nor a properly designated convening authority for the purposes of convening a gcm nor could he be deemed considered to be a legally and validly appointed conforming authority for the purposes of exercising the power under section 160 of the army act. ..... the charge-sheet dated 18th november, 1991 disclosed the commission of offences punishable contrary to sections 39(a) and 63 of the army act. ..... it is further contended that under the army act, rules and regulations made thereunder, there was no obligation for the appellants to appoint a judge-advocate who should have been senior in rank to the accused on the analogy that the members of the court martial who tried the accused are required to be of the same or higher rank to the accused ..... the unplaced candidate are not usurpers of office, they were appointed by the competent authority to the posts of munsifs with the concurrence of the high court, though they had not been found suitable for appointment according to the norms fixed by the public service commission. .....

Joginder Singh Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 5(1969)DLT1

..... 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-section (1) of section 9 of the territorial army act, 1948; (f) persons holding commissions in the army in india 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 liable as members ..... november, 1962, issued by the central government in exercise of powers conferred by section 9 of the army act, 1950, which reads- 'inexercise of the powers conferred by section 9 of the army act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the central government hereby declares that all persons subject to that act, who are nto on active service underclause (i) of section 3 thereof, shall, wherever they may be serving, be deemed to be on active service within the meaning of that act for the purpose of the said act and of any toher law for the time being in force'.this .....

Jagraj Singh (No. 14412115k) Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... absenting himself (red ink entry) without leave and intoxication) (d) army act section 39(a) - 28 days rigorous imprisonment and section 48(i) and 14 days detention awarded (absenting himself on ..... red ink entry) without leave and intoxication) (e) army act section 48 - 07 days rigorous imprisonment (intoxication) and 07 days pay fine awarded on ..... red ink entry) without leave and intoxication) (c) army act section 39(a) - 14 days rigorous imprisonment and section 48(i) awarded on 21 dec ..... (b) army act section 39(a) - 07 days rigorous imprisonment and section 48(i) ..... contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the gist of the disparaging entries which have been awarded to the petitioner may be noticed which are as follows:- (a) army act section 39(a) - 07 days rigorous imprisonment (absenting himself awarded on 25 dec 1997. ..... if such a cours.is warranted on the merits of the case, a wo or an nco may be reduced to one rank lower than his substantive rank under army act section 20(4).procedure for dismissal/discharge of undesirable jcos/wos/or 4. ..... the corps or department to which the person to be discharged belongs except that in the case of junior commissioned officers and warrant officers of the special medical section of the army medical corps, the commanding officer . ..... no.6991 of 2012 (o&m) [11].of the medical services, army, and in the case of junior commissioned officer and warrant officers of remounts, veterinary and farms.corps, the commanding officer . .....

Sewa Ram Nagial Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 1983CriLJ1788

..... , convicting him under section 63 of the army act and section 3(i)(c) of the indian official secrets act, 1923, for short, official secrets act, read with section 69 of the army act, and cashiering him and sentencing him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. ..... later on, he was according to him, charged under section 63 of the army act and section 3(i)(c) of the official secrets act read with section 69 of the army act, and was punished by the g. 0. ..... , which was constituted in clear violation of section 109 of the army act and rules 37, 39 (e), 40 and 197-a of the army rules and an objection taken by him in that behalf was wrongly overruled by the g. c. m. ..... secondly, it was argued that before an offence may be said to be a civil offence as defined by section 3(ii) of the army act, it should be triable by an ordinary criminal court in terms of clause (viii), and not by a court specially empowered to try it. ..... the question of double jeopardy did not arise, because the petitioner was not reduced to his substantive rank of lieutenant by way of any punishment at the conclusion of his trial for any offence, but as a consequence of army instruction sai l/s/74, which requires an army officer to vacate his acting rank, who fails to perform the duties of his appointment for twenty-one days due to his arrest. .....

Lt Col (Ts) Sasanka Shekhar SwaIn Vs. Union of India, Through the Secr ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... we have perused the parawise comments of the presiding officer in this respect and apparently no injustice has been done and all provisions and procedures of the army act and rules with reference to aa section 130 and ar 44 have been duly complied with. ..... (vii) the seventh charge is, under army act section 59(e), contempt of court martial by causing an interruption in the proceedings of such court in that he, at secundrabad, on 28th october 1999, while being member of a general court martial, said its sham and mock court and i will not sit in the court or words to that effect and thereafter refused to return to the court room, thereby causing interruption in the proceedings of the said court martial. ..... (i) the first charge is, under army act section 63, an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline in that he, at secunderabad, on 4th september 1999, improperly obtained for himself sick-in-quarters for 72 hours, from the duty medical officer, military hospital secunderabad, whereas actually he was advised only light duties by mr-4059x lt col krm rao, classified specialist (medicine and cardiology) at the aforesaid hospital, as he well knew. .....