COURT No.2 ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI E. OA 399/2018 Lt Col Vinay Lakhera (Retd) ... Applicant VERSUS Union of India and Ors. .... Respondents For Applicant : Ms. Shreya Gulati, Advocate for Mr. S. S. Pandey, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Arvind Patel, Advocate Maj Sridhar J, OIC, Legal Cell CORAM HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE ANJANA MISHRA, MEMBER (J) HON’BLE LT GEN P. M. HARIZ, MEMBER (A) ORDER 25.07.2023 Vide our orders of even date, we have dismissed the application. Faced with the situation, learned counsel appearing for the applicant makes an oral prayer for grant of leave to appeal under Section 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We find no question of law much less any question of law of general public importance involved in the matter to grant leave to appeal. Hence, the prayer for grant of leave to appeal is n declined. ‘(ANJANA MISHRA) MEMBER (J) : ois (P. M. HARIZ) MEMBER (A) Priya/NamitaCOURT NO.2, ARMED FORCES TRIBU NAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA 399/201 Lt Col Vinay Lakhera (Retd) .. Applicant VERSUS ee Union of India and Ors. - ... Respondent For Applicant: — Mr. S.S. Pandey, Advocate For Respondents: | _ Mr. Arvind Patel, Advocate RAM HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE ANJANA MISHRA, MEMBER(J) HON’BLE LT. GEN P M HARIZ, MEMBER(A) ORDER The present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 by the applicant, who is’ a 1992. batch officer from the Regiment of Artillery and is aggrieved by his non-empanelment by the No. 3 Selection Board (SB) to the rank of Colonel. The applicant has impugned the order dated 11.04.2017 vide which the result of No 3 SB held from 28.03.2017 to 31.03.2017 was declared. He has made the following prayers: (a) Call for the records based on which the Respondents have passed the impugned orders dated 11.04.2017 and 13.11.2017 along with the orders dated 08.07.2015 and 25.04.2016: thereby the applicant was not empanelled for such promotion in his first and second consideration as well OA 399/2018 Lt Col Vinay Lakhera (Retd)as was denied his third consideration and thereafter quash such orders including otder dated 11.04.2017. (b) Direct the respondents to give a meaningful consideration and promotion to the applicant with all consequential benefits w.e.f. Sep 2008 if his profile is found to be above the profile of any of the officer of the batch including the last empanelled officer of 1992 batch approved in Sep 2008 and in any subsequent considerations. (c) In alternative, in the event the applicant is not promoted in_ his first and second consideration, the respondents may be directed to hold the No.3 SB as Final Review not withstanding his retirement and promote him if he is meeting the grade with 1994 batch last empanelled officer with all consequential benefits. (d) Issue any other. order which the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit. es Brief Facts of the Case 2. The factual matrix of this case is that the applicant was commissioned in the Regiment of Artillery on 19.12.1992. He was promoted to the rank of Lt Col w.e.f. 19.12.2005. He was considered by the No 3 SB for promotion to the rank of Col in Sept 2008 as a fresh case but was not empanelled. Aggrieved, he filed a non-statutory complaint dated 09.11.2008 impugning the CR for the period covering Sept; 2002 to May 2003. The same was rejected on 08.04.2009 as the competent authority found the CR to be consistent with the overall profile. Thereafter, he submitted a OA 399/2018 Lt Col Vinay Lakhera (Retd)[3 statutory complaint dated 25.10.2010 but the same was also rejected on 26.04.2011. 3. Being aggrieved, by the above rejections, the applicant filed OA 1168/2011 in AFT, Regional Bench Chandigarh. The Hon’ble Regional Bench vide its order dated 30.07.2013 allowing the OA, set aside the CR impugned therein covering the period 07.09.2002 to 31.05.2003, quashed his non- empanelment by No 3 SB and directed the respo