Dismissed

Sub M Bishma Rao through Pairokar M Sujatha v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC15 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/5305/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition by an Army JCO challenging harassment by respondents. The bench held that since an effective statutory remedy exists under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, the High Court could not entertain the petition under Article 226 absent special circumstances.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Armed Forces Tribunal for reliefs sought.

Sub M Bishma Rao through Pairokar M Sujatha Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 5305/2024

¶4

SUB M BISHMA RAO THROUGH PAIROKAR M SUJATHA

¶5

.....Petitioner Through: Dr.Janak Raj Rana with Mr.Vinod Patidar, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr.Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr.Alexandar Matahi Paikaday, Advs & Mr.Aakash Pathak, GP. Major Anish Muralidhar.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR O R D E R % 15.07.2024

¶9

The petitioner, who is working as a JCO in the Indian Army has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

¶10

“A. Issue a writ in the nature of Quo warranto and/or any other appropriate writ/s, order/s or direction/s to declare the action of the respondent no. 5 and 6 of harassing the petitioner vitiated out of vindictiveness as unjust, arbitrary, malafide, illegal and gross misuse of power

¶11

B. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ/s, order/s or direction/s to respondent no.l to 4 to initiate proper disciplinary proceedings against the respondent no. 5 and 6 for gross abuse of power and harassing the petitioner. .

¶12

C. To pass any such and others orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest ofjustice.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2024 at 12:14:25

¶14

D. Award Costs.”

¶15

At the outset, we have put to learned counsel for the petitioner as to how the present petition would be maintainable before this Court, when the petitioner has an effective statutory remedy before the learned Armed Forces Tribunal(the Tribunal). He submits that since the petitioner is aggrieved by colourable exercise of power by the respondent nos.5 & 6, he is entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶16

Having perused the provisions of Section 3(o) read with Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act(the Act), we are of the view that once the petitioner is entitled to approach the learned Tribunal qua any grievance relating to his service matter, except the matters which are excluded specifically under Section 3(o) of the Act, there is no reason for this Court to entertain the present petition under exercise of its extraordinary writ petition. In our considered opinion, the petitioner has not been able to make out any special circumstances for this Court to entertain the writ petition.

¶17

The writ petition, accordingly, stands dismissed with liberty to approach the learned Tribunal qua the reliefs sought in the petition, which will be considered by the Tribunal on its own merit.

¶18

REKHA PALLI, J

¶19

SHALINDER KAUR, J

¶20

JULY 15, 2024/ sr

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2024 at 12:14:25

Sub M Bishma Rao through Pairokar M Sujatha v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sub M Bishma Rao through Pairokar M Sujatha v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gyanankur Vs Food Corporation of India & Ors.

Shukla Rani Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mata Krishnawati Memorial Education Society & Anr. Vs Delhi Development Authority

Arjun Kolhi & Anr. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Sh. Om Prakash Singh

M/S Paras Impex Vs Office of the Commissioner of Customs (Export) & Ors.

Hazrat Nizamuddin Welfare Association Regd Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors. & Ors.

Evermore Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7-1 Delhi

Sandeep Trikha and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ajeet Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Faruqe Khan Dead through Mojma Khatun Vs Dgp Crpf and Anr.

Mahesh Yadav Vs Union of India & Anr.

Mrs. Chinu Vs Union of India and Ors.

Si (Gd) Ajay Khungur Daimari Vs Shri Ajay Kumar Bhalla and Ors.