Army Major Mrs.Lata Kakkar v. Secty Mins of Defence N.Delhi

Telangana HC15 Apr 2010WP/231/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court transferred a writ petition filed by an Indian Army officer, challenging his dismissal, to the Armed Forces Tribunal at Chennai. The Court held that the dispute constitutes a 'service matter' under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, ousting the High Court's jurisdiction. The Registry was directed to transfer the case immediately.

What did the court decide?

Directive to transfer the writ petition to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Southern Regional Bench at Chennai.

Army Major Mrs.Lata Kakkar Vs Secty Mins… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH

¶2

WRIT PETITION No. 231 of 2003.

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner was a Regular Class I Officer in the Indian Army. He filed the present writ petition questioning the order of dismissal dt. 31.12.1996 issued by the Chief Army Staff, New Delhi dismissing the petitioner from service.

¶5

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that pursuant to the enactment of Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, the Armed Forces Tribunals have been constituted in different regions of the Country to deal with the service matters of Army, Navy and Air Force Personnel and therefore this writ petition has to be transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Southern Regional Bench at Chennai.

¶6

The petitioner who appeared as party-in-person submitted that this Court passed an order on 24.12.2009 retaining the matter to be heard by this Court and he referred the order dt. 24.12.2009, which reads as under:

¶7

“Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri.S.R.Sanku. It is pointed out by him that the impugned order in the writ petition is not one which can be a subject matter of consideration before the Armed Forces Tribunal, which is constituted pursuant to Act No. 54 o 2007, this issue can also be agitated by the respondents if they so desire, at the time of final hearing. I therefore consider it appropriate to retain the W.P. for the present instead of transferring it to the Armed Forces Tribunal. Post the writ petition for hearing in the 2^nd week of February 2010.”

¶8

Relying on the above order, the petitioner seeks to retain the writ petition before this Court for disposal.

¶9

On the other hand, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents submitted that the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 has been enacted for the adjudication of complaints and disputes regarding service matters and appeals arising out of the verdicts of the courts-marshal of the members of the three services (Army, Navy and Air Force) to provide for quicker and less expensive justice to the members of the said Armed Forces of the union and that establishment of an independent Armed Forces Tribunal will fortify the trust and confidence amongst members of the three services in the system of dispensation of justice in relation to their service matters and that the Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (4) of Section 5 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 ( Act No. 55 of 2007), has established the Bench of Armed Forces Tribunal at Chennai with effect from 26.10.2009, by Gazette Notification

¶10

dt. 21.10.2009 and the said Tribunal has the jurisdiction within the territorial limits of the State of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh and that since the dispute raised in this writ petition clearly falls under the definition of “ Service matters” as defined under Section 3(o) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 and since the jurisdiction of this Court stands ousted under Section 34 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 from the date the Tribunal has been constituted, the writ petition may be transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Southern Regional Bench at Chennai for disposal.

¶11

Having regard to the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and since the impugned order in the writ petition is an order of dismissal, which is a ‘service matter’ as defined under Section 3(o) of the Armed

¶12

Forces Tribunal Act, the Registry is directed to transfer this writ petition to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Southern Regional Bench at Chennai immediately for disposal.

¶13

G.CHANDRAIAH,J 15.04.2010. krb.

¶14

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH

¶15

WRIT PETITION No. 231 of 2003.

¶16

Dt. 15.04.2010.

Army Major Mrs.Lata Kakkar v. Secty Mins of Defence N.Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Army Major Mrs.Lata Kakkar v. Secty Mins of Defence N.Delhi

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

Mulakaledu Anwar Basha, Vs The Chairman-cum-Presiding Officer

Smt.v.Ramalakshmi Vs Regr Jntu Hyd and 3 Others

P.Venkateshwar Raju, Vs a.P.State Housing Corporation Ltd.

Sri Ramkishan Rao Pawar Vs Ekachakra Hire Purchase and Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Madanam Yellaiah, Vs The Andhra Prdesh State Road Transport Corporation

G.Gangadhar Vs The Labour Court - Ii.