GOPALAKRSIHNAN NAIR D. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.8656/2020 through which the learned Single Judge found that the writ petition was not maintainable on account of the fact that the writ petitioner has an effective alternative remedy before the Armed Forces Tribunal under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007.

(2.) The appellant is an ex-serviceman. The case of the appellant is that when the orders issued are totally without jurisdiction, it is open for him to file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India notwithstanding the availability of an alternative remedy. He relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Siemens Engineering and Manufacturing Co. of India Ltd. v. Union of India (AIR 1976 SC 1785), in support of his contention.

(3.) The writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P5 order issued by the 3rd respondent. Ext.P5 is a communication issued by the 3 rd respondent intimating the appellant that while the name of his wife has been corrected as Saraswathi Amma R instead of Saraswathi in the pension papers, as requested, the correction of her date of birth from 1 st December 1967 to 15th May, 1964 can only happen if the following documents are made available:-