SITAL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, a Sepoy in Indian Army has in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenged the order of his discharged passed on 30.10.1990.

(2.) The challenge to the impugned order of discharge is on numerous grounds. The three grounds which were urged during the course of hearing are: (a) that the order has not been passed by a Brigade/Sub Area Commander of 631 Bn. EME on whose strength the petitioner was on the relevant date but by the General Officer Commanding, 31 Armed Division who had no jurisdiction to pass such order in the case of the petitioner; (b) the discharge under Army Rule 13(3)(iii)(v) can be ordered on grounds other than misconduct and since the impugned order of discharge is based on alleged misconduct, it 'was incumbent for the respondents to have tried the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Army Act by affording due opportunity of being heard and leading his defence; and (c) thirdly that the impugned order of discharge is against the mandatory provisions of the Army Act and the Rules and the same is not based upon any material available on record.

(3.) We have heard counsel for the parties and been taken through the record which was made available for our perusal.