( 1 ) A common question as to the interpretation of Section 122 of the Army act, 1950 ( the Act for brevity) falls for consideration in both these appeals and hence they are being disposed of by this common judgment. The appellant in Writ appeal No. 687 of 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the first appellant) is a Colonel in indian Army whereas the appellant in Writ appeal No. 688 of 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the second appellant) is a Captain. They filed Writ Petitions being W. P. No. 3859 of 1999 and 6583 of 1999 respectively challenging the order of the second respondent directing that the officers be tried by General Court Martial! in relation to an office (sic. offence) as contemplated by the Act. The main contention before the learned Single Judge is that the General Court Martial ordered by the second respondent is barred by limitation in terms of Section 122 of the Act. The learned Single Judge dismissed both the Writ Petitions placing reliance on rule 53 of the Army Rules 1954 (hereinafter called the Rules ). The common judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 25-4-2001 is assailed in these Writ Appeals.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case as