JUDGMENT :

Suresh Kumar Kait, J.

1. The above captioned two petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking setting aside of order dated 23.02.2022 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal in OA 122/2022 and OA 156/2022 respectively and consequently, setting aside the Court of Inquiry dated 27.01.2022 being illegal, biased and against the principles of natural justice as well as in violation of mandatory provisions of Army Rule-180.

2. The petitioner - Col. J.P.S. Bakshi [in W.P.(C) 4307/2022], who is currently posted as Director in Border Roads Organization and petitioner- Col. Puneet Sharma [in W.P (C) 4371/2022] are aggrieved of order dated 23.02.2022 passed by the learned Arms Forces Tribunal vide which their challenge to the Attachment Order proposing disciplinary action against them based on the report bearing No. C/06290/WC/852/20(07)/AG/DV-2 dated 27.01.2022, has been dismissed. The petitioners are also aggrieved by order bearing No. 2020/Discp/DV-2 (236 Engineer Regiment) dated 06.03.2020, vide which respondent No. 5-GOC HQ 11 Corps has directed HQ 7 Inf Div to take disciplinary action against the petitioners.

3. While advancing arguments on behalf of petitioners, learned counsel appearing on their behalf submitted that the impugned directions to attach the petitioners and take disciplinary action against them are based upon illegal court of inquiry; having being conducted in a biased manner. It was submitted that the Presiding Officer- respondent No. 5 has conducted the inquiry proceedings on the sole ground that disciplinary action has been directed vide impugned Attachment Order dated 27.01.2022 and even copy of disciplinary proceedings has not been furnished to the petitioners.

4. To put-forth the factual position, petitioner- COL JPS Bakshi on 09.12.2016 and petitioner- COL Puneet Sharma on 09.06.2016 took over the command of 236 Engineer Regiment when the Regiment was deployed in Counter Insurgency Operations in Guwahati (Assam) on OP-RHINO. The main body of the Regiment moved to under HQ 11Corps. 236 Engr Regt on 02.06.2018. The first meeting to monitor progress and execution of the works was held on 04.06.2018 wherein they, along with other officials of the team, came to know about 24 sites of six units where the work was under initial progress. Petitioners further claim that while the Regiment was in the process of shifting the unit stores from the Railway Station to a place 30 kms away from Jalandhar Cantt., the Regiment was allotted six additional (special) construction works of constructing security wall/fence around various Military Units/Installations in the Corps zone of HQ 11 Corps, covering the area of approx. 14.36 km, by HQ 11 Corps vide MO4 letter No A/40355/18-19/WC/SAE/MO-4 dated 30.05.2018. The last date for construction of integrated Fence works/jobs was fixed as 30.11.2018 and for other constructions of Hybrid Fence works/jobs, was fixed as 31.12.2018. Petitioners claim that the dead line for execution of the aforesaid work was stipulated without consulting them and since they both were also in the process of familiarizing with the location, the short period of 06 months created huge pressure and stress on the unit of petitioners.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submitted that the construction work/ job was sanctioned as an emergent measure to strengthen the security around the Military Units/Installations on an urgent basis due to the situation arising out of the opening of the cantonment routes to the general public and the heightened security threat from the enemy across the western border, however, role of petitioners was limited to monitoring of execution of the work after receipt of the necessary materials which were required to be sanctioned and procured, through a process of electronic-contract for which General GOC 11 Corps and General Staff (GS) Branch of HQ 11 Corps, were the Competent Financial Authority (CFA). Neither petitioners nor any officer of their Command we