In writ petitions challenging a decision, the Court held the petitioner should approach the Armed Forces Tribunal under Section 34 of the Act. The petitions were transferred to the Tribunal.
Writ petitions transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal at Mumbai.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
997 WRIT PETITION NO.4344 OF 2017
WITH WP/4120/2017
MANOJ PITAMBAR PARDESHI VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. M.M. Bhokarikar ASG for Respondents 1 to 4 : Mr. S.S. Deve Advocate for Respondent 5 : Mr. S.P. Tiwari
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & R.N. LADDHA, JJ. DATED : 05/08/2021.
PER COURT :
. We have heard Mr. Bhokrikar, learned advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deve, learned Advocate submits that the petitioner has alternate remedy before the Armed Force Tribunal under section 34 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007.
[ R.N. LADDHA, J. ] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
ssc/
MANOJ PITAMBAR PARDESHI
THE UNION OF INDIA
S.V. GANGAPURWALA
R.N. LADDHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
