Armed Forces Tribunal

Court

Latest documents

• Transferred Application No. 1364 of 2010. Case: Mohan Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. Being aggrieved with the impugned order of punishment dated 28.02.2002 of severe reprimand and denial of the rank of Sub Major and also salary of the said rank w.e.f. 01.08.2000 to 31.08.2002, petitioner preferred a writ petition, bearing No. 1301 of 2004 (SS) in the High Court of Uttaranchal, now Uttarakhand, Nainital, which has been transferre...

• O.A. No. 122 of 2011. Case: Sanjay Kumar Verma Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. Present O.A. has been preferred under section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (In short the Act'), being aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 19.03.2007, the impugned discharge certificate dated 27.05.2009 and the order rejecting the appeal of the Applicant dated 27.01.2011 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the case a...

• OA 593/2016. Case: Arun Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  3. The facts that are necessary for disposing of this original application as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant are as follows:- The applicant was commissioned in the Corps of Engineers in the Army on 13.06.1981. He was promoted from time to time to higher ranks. On his promotion as Brigadier, he was posted as Chief Engineer, Project

• OA 302/2014. Case: Kamla Kanta Das Vs The Union of India and Ors. Armed Forces Tribunal

  (d) To direct disciplinary action against Col. Vishu Sikka and the members of the C OI in accordance with para 4 of Army HQ letter No. 32908/AG/DV-1(P) dated 16 October, 2000 for having connived with Gen Cruz. (e) To direct disciplinary action against Maj Gen SA Cruz, VSM for having misused his position, having forged documents, having tutored wit...

• T.A. No. 1000 of 2010. Case: Kalawati Devi Vs The Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. Smt. Kalawati Devi, the petitioner preferred a writ petition, bearing number W.P. No. 954 (SS) of 2001 in the High Court of Uttaranchal at Nainital with a contention that her husband Keshav Ram is not traceable since 17.08.1989 and has been declared deserter by the respondents/Army (7-Sikh Light Infantry). The petitioner, accordingly prayed that...

• Transfer Application No. 96 of 2016. Case: D.V.S. Rana Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. O.A. preferred by the petitioner bearing No. 01(J)/2016 before the Armed forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Jabalpur has been transferred to this Bench by the Hon'ble Chairperson of the Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi for adjudication of the controversy raised in the petition. The petitioner has assailed the CRs covering the perio...

• Transferred Application No. 89 of 2016. Case: Mohd. Irfan Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. Initially, the petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 6135 (S/S) of 2013 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, sitting at Lucknow Bench, Lucknow, which has been transferred to this Tribunal in pursuance to power contained in Section 34 of Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 by order dated 05.08.2016 for adjudication of controvers...

• M.A. No. 784 of 2016 and O.A. No. 317 of 2016. Case: R.P. Suthan Vs Union of India and Ors. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. The Original Application has been filed by Vice Admiral R.P. Suthan, No. 01137H (Retd) seeking the benefit of broad banding of disability element of disability pension granted to him. The applicant has also sought that Regulation 37(b) of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008 be quashed as it denies the benefit of Regulation 94(c) of the Pe...

• O.A. No. 93 of 2016. Case: Jadhav Maruti Bhau Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. The Original Application has been filed by Jadhav Maruti Bhau, Ex. Naib Subedar No. JC 404396 A, of Brigade of Guards, seeking disability element of disability pension with the benefit of rounding off. The applicant has also sought that Regulation 53(b) of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008, be quashed, as it does not provide benefit of

• O.A. No. 105 of 2016. Case: Vinodkumar K. Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  2. The applicant was enrolled in the Army Ordnance Corps (AOC) on 21 December 1990 and was invalided out from service with effect from 21 October 2006 under Army Rules 13(3)III(iii) having been found medically unfit for further retention in service. The Invaliding Medical Board (IMB) assessed him to have the disability 'Recurrent Depressive Disorde...

Featured documents

• O.A. No. 89 and 96 of 2012. Case: 1. Ex. Hav. K.P. Nanda Kumaran, 2. EX Naik Joseph Vs 1. The Union of India and Ors., 2. The Union of India, The Chief of The Army Staff, OIC Records, AMC Records and The Principal Controller of Defence Accounts. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. In these two original applications a common question of law is involved, therefore, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, both the matters were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Heard Mr. Ramesh C.R. and Mr. T.R. Jagadeesh for the applicants and Mr....

• TA 52 of 2012 (Arising out of OA 119 of 2012). Case: A. Krishna Moorthy Vs Union of India. Armed Forces Tribunal

  Issue directions to the respondents to quash the EME Records letter dated 02 February 2012 and direct them to immediately detail the applicant for up-gradation Courses of Class II and I for promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar from Havildar, within 4-6 months keeping his seniority as the prime...

• T.A. No. 417 of 2010. Case: Ald. Satyavir Singh S/o. Sh. Sardar Singh Vs Union of India (UOI) through its Secretary Government of India Ministry of Defence and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed in Delhi High court challenging the Summary Court Martial (SCM) proceedings initiated against the appellant for offence under Section 69 of the Army Act read with Section 354 IPC and whereby he was convicted for the said ...

• T.A. No. 653/2009. Case: Anil Kumar Vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  4. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this petition are that petitioner was enrolled in Army as a Sepoy on 22.08.1966 and while in service, contracted the disease known as Tuberculosis. He was invalided out of service on 18.05.1997 in medical category EEE. His disability was assessed...

• T.A. No. 182 of 2010. Case: Ashok Kumar Singh Vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. The applicant filed a writ petition (civil) No. 9792 of 2009 in the Hon'ble Delhi High Court praying that orders of his discharge which was initiated vide movement order dated 20.6.2009 (Annexure P-2) be quashed and he be granted two years extension of service. The same was transferred to the...

• T.A. 278 of 2009 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 516 of 1999. Case: Balkar Singh Vs The Union of India (UOI) and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of Constitution of India was brought by the accused-Appellant challenging the findings of the Summary Court Martial whereby the Appellant was held guilty for the offence Under Section 46 (a) and 65 of the Army Act and sentenced to undergo one year RI and...

• TA 164 of 2012 (Arising out of CWP 12580 of 1998). Case: Bhim Singh Vs Union of India. Armed Forces Tribunal

  2. Bhim Singh (now deceased) filed the above mentioned writ petition on the allegations that he was enrolled in the Army on 24.3.62 was promoted as Naib Subedar in March, 1978, was commissioned as an SL Officer on 27.7.81 and was promoted as Major on 27.7.94 vide Gazette Notification dated 1.5.1995....

• O.A. No. 147 of 2010. Case: Brig P.S. Gill Vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that even if the entire evidence collected during the course of inquiry is accepted on its face value, no offence is prima facie made out against the Petitioner. It is, therefore, necessary to look into the relevant law and the...

• OA No. 32 of 2010. Case: Burns Thaiparambil, Aged 36 Years, S/o. Antony Thaiparambil, Thaiparambil House, K.K. Road, Opp. Akshaya Hospital, Kadavanthra, Kochi - 682020. (No. 762127 B, Ex. SGT) Vs Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi, Under Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi and Wing Commander, OIC P & WW (DP) for AOC, Air Force Record Office, Subroto Park, New Delhi. Armed Forces Tribunal

  1. None is present for the applicant. Heard the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records. This application under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 has been filed by the applicant for disability pension with consequential benefits. 2. The relevant facts are that,...

• T.A. No. 29 of 2010. Case: C.S. Gill Vs Union of India (UOI) and Anr.. Armed Forces Tribunal

  2. Petitioner by this petition prayed for issuing an order or direction to the respondent to promote the petitioner to the rank of Brigadier as his course mates have been promoted to the said rank from the date his batchmates junior to him has been so promoted with all consequential benefits with...