O.A. No. 29 of 201331 Oct 2013. Case: A. Murugan Vs Union of India, The General Officer and The Commanding Officer. Armed Forces Tribunal

Case NumberO.A. No. 29 of 201331 Oct 2013
Party NameA. Murugan Vs Union of India, The General Officer and The Commanding Officer
CounselFor Appellant: M. Venkadeshan, A. Ansar and R. Nilavazhagan and For Respondents: B. Shanthakumar, SPC
JudgesV. Periya Karuppiah, J. (Member (J)) and Anand Mohan Verma, Member (Ad.)
IssueArmed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 - Section 15; Arms Act 1959 - Sections 38(1), 39(a); Army Act, 1950 - Sections 39, 39(b), 72
Judgement DateOctober 31, 2013
CourtArmed Forces Tribunal


Anand Mohan Verma, Member (Ad.), (Regional Bench, Chennai)

  1. This application has been filed seeking relief of quashing first respondent's letter No. C/07564/DV-3(B), dated 3.5.2003 and to direct the respondents to treat the order of dismissal as one of compulsory retirement to enable the petitioner to get pension and other terminal benefits. The facts of the case are that the petitioner, who was enrolled in Aug 1989, was granted leave from 3.8.1999 to 14.8.1999, but he failed to rejoin Unit on expiry of the leave and rejoined on 10.3.2000. Thereafter, he again absented himself without leave with effect from 30.4.2000 and rejoined on 19.8.2000, whereafter Summary of Evidence was recorded following which he was tried by a Summary Court Martial on 30.9.2000 in which a sentence was inflicted on the applicant as "dismissed from service". He filed a petition against the dismissal order which was rejected by the then Chief of Army Staff on 3.5.2003. The petitioner filed O.A. No. 36 of 2012 along with M.A. No. 21 of 2012 for condoning delay in filing before this Tribunal in which the order passed on 14th February 2013 is under:

    The learned counsel of the applicant while arguing the case finally submitted before us that the applicant may be reinstated in service with all monetary and attendant benefits. When this tribunal has put forth a question before the learned counsel for the applicant as to how the applicant will be fit to join duty after a lapse of 10 years, the Counsel of applicant came forward to amend the prayer. Further there is a delay of 3036 days in filing this Original Application. The learned counsel for the applicant therefore requested us to permit him withdraw the Miscellaneous Application and the Original Application with liberty to file a fresh miscellaneous application and the Original Application. Necessary endorsement was made in the Original Application by the counsel for applicant to that effect.

    In fine, the miscellaneous application and the original application is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh application. Time granted is one month.

    The petitioner thereafter filed this O.A. seeking relief as mentioned above.

  2. The petitioner in his application and through the pleadings of his learned counsel Mr. M. Venkadeshan would submit that the petitioner was enrolled in August 1989. He was granted 12 days leave from 3rd August 1999 to 14th August 1999 in which he stated that he was to take care of his wife who according to him was in the initial stage of pregnancy. During the said leave, he was taken ill and was treated by a Government Doctor for which he would produce a medical certificate. He claimed that his parents did not take due care of his wife who was at the initial stage of pregnancy. In support of his wife's health condition, he would produce a medical certificate from a doctor who had treated her. One of the reasons stated by the petitioner for not rejoining on expiry of 12 days leave was also the health of his father who too was unwell and to support this claim, the petitioner would submit a medical certificate. He would state that he rejoined the Unit on 10th March 2000 thus overstaying leave by 206 days. While he was on duty, his wife delivered a baby on 13.4.2000. His neighbours at his home informed him by telephone that his wife had been beaten up by his brother. Hearing this on 30.4.2000, he again rushed home to take care of his wife after intimating his superior officers. He rejoined on 19th August 2000 along with his wife and three daughters aged 5 years, 3 years and 6 months. On arrival in...

To continue reading

Request your trial