Mathew Thomas v. Union of India
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court dismissed the writ petition alleging the Armed Forces Tribunal was not in session and directed the petitioner to approach the Tribunal. An interim order was extended for 15 days.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner directed to move Armed Forces Tribunal; interim order extended for 15 days.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 12299 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
1 MATHEW THOMAS AGED 70 YEARS S/O. THOMAS, 'SILENT NIGHT', AMANAKARA P.O, RAMAPURAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 576
BY ADV R.DIVAKARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SOUTH BLOCK, CABINET SECRETARIAT, RAISINA HILL, NEW DELHI 110 001.
2 THE COMMODORE (FOR REGULATING OFFICER), BUREAU OF SAILORS, SIONTROMBAY ROAD, MANKHURD, MUMBAI-400 088.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition should be closed given that the petitioners allege the Armed Forces Tribunal was not in session.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
MATHEW THOMAS
- respondent
UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
- respondent
THE COMMODORE (FOR REGULATING OFFICER), BUREAU OF SAILORS
- respondent
THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE (FOR SAILORS SECTION), NAVAL PAY OFFICE
- respondent
LT. CDR. MOHIT BIST
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court