IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 14.10.2025 WING COMMANDER VINEET MAHAJAN . .Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI PRESENT: Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate for Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advocate for the petitioner.

(appeared through virtual mode).

Mr. Rohit Verma, Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents-UOI.

****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the show cause notice dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure P-2) , by which, the petitioner has been asked to file his reply as to why action should not be taken by the Government under Section 19 of the Air Force Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to the ‘Rules 1969) read with Rule 16 of the Armed Force Rules, 1969 keeping in view the allegations which are being alleged against the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that prior to the issuance of the said impugned show cause notice, a court of enquiry against the petitioner was convened but in the said court of enquiry due opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioner to defend himself and once, the said court of enquiry has not been conducted in the manner so required while violating the rules of natural justice, the impugned show cause of notice dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure P-2) which is based upon the findings of said Court of enquiry is liable to be set-aside, especially when the said Court of enquiry was convened in violation of rules of natural justice.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had approached the Armed Force Tribunal and the Armed Force Tribunal looked into the grievance being raised by the petitioner and ultimately reached to the conclusion that all the witnesses who were examined during the Court of enquiry were allowed to be cross-examined by the petitioner and it is only thereafter, that keeping in view the examination of witnesses and the evidence brought on record the said show cause notice was issued to the petitioner so as to allow him to give his objections to the proposed action to be taken by the authorities concerned on the said show cause notice.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that all the arguments/objections which have been raised by the petitioner in the reply to the impugned show cause notice qua the manner in which the court of enquiry was conducted or qua the aspect that he was not given due opportunity of hearing to defend himself, will be looked into with open mind by the authorities concerned and thereafter, the decisions upon the show cause notice will be taken as to whether any further actions needs to be taken against the petitioner or not.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that a detailed reply on the said show cause notice has already been filed by the petitioner and in case the petitioner wishes to file any supplementary reply to the said impugned show cause notice, then the said supplement reply can be filed by him within the period of two weeks from today, the same will also be looked into by the authorities concerned while deciding upon the show cause notice.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file with their able assistance.

7. It is a conceded position that as of now, no order causing prejudice to the petitioner has been passed by the authorities concerned in pursuance to the impugned show cause notice dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure P-2). Even in the said impugned show cause notice, the objections have been called from the petitioner to the proposed action to be taken by the authorities concerned on the said show cause notice and the petitioner has already filed a detailed reply to the said show cause notice and keeping in view the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent recorded herein above, the liberty has been given to the petitioner to even file supplementary reply to the sh