BALAKRISHNAN.V.P Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner says that he had earlier approached the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short), seeking that the respondents therein be directed to pay him the disability pension; but that the same was disposed of through Ext.P2 order, directing the competent Authority of the Union of India to pass orders on his statutory appeal, which was stated to have been pending before them at that time.

(2.) The petitioner says that, however, the 2nd respondent herein issued Ext.P3 proceedings saying that no appeal had been received in his office; and that, therefore, he preferred Ext.P4 appeal again, which is dated 20.07.2015. He says that, however, Exhibit P4 also has not been considered by the said Authority until now; and therefore, that he preferred an Original Application before the Tribunal again in the year 2019, which, however, had been returned saying that there are certain defects therein which, though he was ready to cure and represent, could not be so done because the Tribunal did not have sufficient members to to resume sitting. He, therefore, prays that respondents 1 and 2 be directed to consider Ext.P4 appeal at the earliest.

(3.) Sri.P.Vijayakumar, the learned Assistant Solicitor General, submitted that a statement has been filed by him wherein, it has been clearly stated that, even though the petitioner had preferred an O.A on 28.01.2019, there were some defects therein, and that it was returned to him for curing the same. He then submitted that since the petitioner has not represented the O.A. after curing defects, the Tribunal has not been able to consider the same; and asserted that this is only on account of the fault of the petitioner and no one else. He completed his submissions by saying that even though there are no members in the Kochi Regional Bench of the Tribunal as of now, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) has been now published wherein, all matters be that pending, new or old - have been directed to be heard through video-conferencing. He thus prays that this Writ Petition be dismissed and that the petitioner be directed to approach the Tribunal appropriately.