Back
SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, VIKAS BUDHWAR
Ex- Hav Clerk (Stores) Ram Naresh Ram – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Satyajit Mukerji, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned Central Government standing counsel.
2. Against the impugned order dated 05.02.2018 in O.A. No.160 of 2016, passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow, under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the petitioner has a right of Appeal under Section 30 of the Act before the Supreme Court. In the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Major General Shri Kant Sharma & Anr. (2015) 6 SCC 773, Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under :
In Union of India vs. Brigadier P.S. Gill, (2012) 4 SCC 463, this Court while dealing with appeals under Section 30 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act following the procedure prescribed under Section 31 and its maintainability, held as follows:
"8. Section 31 of the Act extracted above specifically provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court but stipulates two distinct routes for such an appeal. The first route to this Court is sanctioned by the Tribunal granting leave to file such an appeal. Section 31(1) in no uncertain terms forbids grant of leave to appeal to this Court unless the Tribunal certifies that a poin
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....
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 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....
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 availability of a statutory remedy of appeal to a higher court is a relevant factor in determining the maintainability of a writ petition,....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while writ petitions under Article 226 are maintainable against orders of the AFT, petitions under Article 227 cannot be filed before the cour....
High Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to review Tribunal's decisions from Principal Bench in New Delhi, affirming jurisdictional rules established by Supreme Court.
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
