Back
RAVI MALIMATH, VISHAL MISHRA
No. 143003734 (Naik Gd) Ravinder Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vishal Mishra, J. - Present Writ Appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has been filed assailing the order dated 08.11.2005 passed by learned Single Judge in Miscellaneous Petition No.3196 of 1992 dismissing the writ petition on merits.
2. Facts giving rise to the litigation are that the appellant was enrolled in the Army (Corps of Artillery) on 03rd of September, 1969. He was promoted to the ranks of Lance Naik and Naik respectively and due for promotion to the rank of Havaldar. The petitioner's promotion was obstructed, for which, a complaint was made by him on 12/13 of January, 1988 before the Chief of Army Staff. The unit of the petitioner was moved from Gurgaon to some where in Northern Sector. Hence, a small unit was left for Gurgaon. The appellant proceeded on annual leave from 12th January, 1988 to 13th March, 1988. He reported back from leave on 23rd of March, 1988. It was pointed out that the authorities were annoyed with the appellant and alleged that on 15th January, 1988 at Raj Rifle Regimental Centre, Delhi, he had taken Rs.12,000/- from Gunner Balwan Singh of his unit. The charges were levelled agai
Court Martial – Non-recording of reasons of appointment of an officer junior in rank as a Judge Advocate in convening order invalidates Court Martial proceedings.
Mandatory procedural compliance in military trials is essential for ensuring fair trial rights; failure to adhere renders proceedings invalid.
The court affirmed the principle that judicial review of administrative actions in disciplinary processes is limited to procedural correctness, not evidential review, and mandated reconsideration of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the scope of judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited, and the court should not substitute its own findings for those of the discipl....
The sharing of sensitive information by a military officer, jeopardizing security, constitutes willful negligence warranting reprimand, regardless of prior findings of not guilty.
A valid conviction in a military trial, even if unconfirmed, prohibits retrial under the Air Force Act.
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
