A petitioner challenged an Armed Forces Tribunal decision declining his request for early hearing of his OA. The Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal's discretion in sequencing hearings and dismissed the writ petition.
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.
$~69
EX-NAIK AJAY KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhijit Anand, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mayank Sharma, Sr. PC with Mr. Kamaldeep, GP for UOI with Major Anish Murlidhar and Captain Carolin Johnson (Army)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
ORDER (ORAL) % 13.08.2025
C.HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. The order impugned in this writ petition reads thus:
This is an application filed seeking early hearing of OA 2599/2023. In out considered view, no case is made out for out of turn hearing.
2. We are flabbergasted that such an order has been made subject matter of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. It is not for this Court to decide the sequence of hearings by the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AJITW.P.(C) 12185/2025 KUMAR Signing Da te:1 4.08.2025 18:25:05
Page 1 of 2
Armed Forces Tribunal1 of the cases pending before it. We are conscious of the fact that the AFT is dealing with a large volume of work and are sanguine that the AFT is duly prioritising matters as per its roster and the urgency of the cause involved.
4. There is no question of this Court interfering with the order passed by the AFT, which has not deemed it appropriate to grant early hearing to the petitioner.
5. The petitioner can only expect consideration of his case as per its seniority, and the urgency of the cause, keeping in view the number of matters pending before the AFT. The petitioner cannot seek any preferential treatment over other litigants whose cases may be of greater seniority.
6. In any event, the AFT alone can take a view in that regard. It has done so, and we see no cause to interfere.
7. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J.
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.
AUGUST 13, 2025 /aky
1 “AFT”, hereinafter Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJITW.P.(C) 12185/2025 KUMAR Signing Da te:1 4.08.2025 18:25:05
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Should the Court overrule the AFT's refusal to grant early hearing to the petitioner's OA?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ex-Naik Ajay Kumar
Union of India
Others
C. Hari Shankar
Om Prakash Shukla
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
