OA No. 101 of 2013. Case: Vivek Choudhary Vs Union of India. Armed Forces Tribunal
| Case Number | OA No. 101 of 2013 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Sham Lal Sharma, Advocate and For Respondents: Suveer Sheokand, CGC |
| Judges | Vinod Kumar Ahuja, J. (Member (J)) and Naresh Verma, Member (Ad.) |
| Issue | Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 19, 22, 23; Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 - Section 14 |
| Judgement Date | April 15, 2014 |
| Court | Armed Forces Tribunal |
Order:
(Chandigarh Regional Bench At Chandimandir)
-
This is an application filed by the petitioner under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 for directing the respondents for quashing and setting aside the Notification issued by Respondent No. 1 removing the petitioner from service and to reinstate him into service, with all consequential benefits.
-
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was serving as a Sqn Ldr with 8 years of service in the Flying Branch. The petitioner alleged that he developed some kind of anxieties, nervousness, stress and strain of official works of flying duties as well as family problems which resulted into his loss of confidence and fear of performance of his duties as a Navigator while flying in the Air Craft.
-
It was further alleged that the petitioner filed an application to seek premature retirement from service which was not allowed by the MoD. The petitioner had been advised and suggested to seek change of Branch of service from Flying Branch to any other ground duties Branch. It was alleged that the petitioner filed an application on 16.08.2008 for change of Branch but it was kept pending for almost three years and he was removed by the MoD as per Annexure A-11 dated 17.07.2011 under Section 19 of AF Act of 1950.
-
It was further alleged that the petitioner had filed another application dated 10.12.2007 for seeking interview with the Chief of the Air Staff. After two years he was issued a show cause notice to file reply and was removed from service as per the impugned order dated 08.09.2011.
-
A notice of the petition was issued to the respondents, who filed reply. It was pleaded by the respondents that the action has been taken in accordance with law and the petitioner has failed to point out any infirmity in the action of the respondents. The request for premature separation from service on compassionate grounds was made by the petitioner, which was not accepted, as intimated to the petitioner vide order dated 09.05.2007. He also filed application for change of Branch and alleged that he had also filed another application due to persisting personal problems which made him not able to concentrate on flying activity and not able to prepare as per the standards required for flying duty.
-
It was further pleaded that the application was put up and the Chief Navigation Instructor brought out that the petitioner refused to fly deliberately performing poorly in ground...
To continue reading
Request your trial