Back
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
NK Santosh Lohar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the case disposition. (Para 1) |
| 2. petition regarding punishment under article 226. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. arguments on jurisdiction related to service matters. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. discussion on tribunal's jurisdiction over punishments. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. legislative intent for armed forces tribunal. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. interpretation of section 3(o) of the 2007 act. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. conclusion on maintainability of petition against summary court martial punishments. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 8. petition maintainable before armed forces tribunal affirmed. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, J. (Oral)
By this common order CWP-3118-2023, CWP-25737-2019 and CWP-7130-2023 are disposed of since issue involved in all the petitions and prayer sought are common. With the consent of parties and for the sake of brevity, facts are borrowed from CWP-3118-2023.
2. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of orders dated 20.09.2018, 15.04.2020 and 31.10.2022 (Anneuxre P-1) whereby petitioner has been awarded punishment of 'Severe Reprimand'.
3. Despite constitution of Armed Forces Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal
The Court determined that minor punishments, including reprimands, fall under 'service matters,' thus the Armed Forces Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear such cases despite their non-dismissal nature.
The power of judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is a basic and inalienable human right, forming part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and cannot be taken away b....
The power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution is a basic feature and cannot be curtailed by legislation. The rule of alternative remedy is a rule of prudence and not a rule of la....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of judicial review vested in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is discretionary and extraordinary, and should not....
Point of Law : No person has a right of appeal against the final order or decision of the Tribunal to the Supreme Court other than those falling under Section 30(2) of the Act, but it is statutory ap....
When a provision of a statute is made subject to another provision by Legislature, this evinces an intent that where latter provision is attracted, former would give way.
The Central Administrative Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over grievances related to combatised personnel within the armed forces, distinguishing them from civilian staff.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Armed Forces Tribunal, a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not be ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
