RAJIV KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interlocutory order passed in an Original Application on the file of the Armed Forces Tribunal ('AFT' for short) is impugned in this Original Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The AFT has declined to stay the operation of the order of Discharge of the petitioner from the services of the Defence Security Corps purely on health grounds. It is alleged that the petitioner is suffering from Obesity, Hypertension, Pre- diabetes and Chronic Kidney disease and that he did not tone up his health within the time stipulated. A preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the Union of India and others that an Original Petition of the nature is not maintainable against an interlocutory order. It is urged that the remedy of the petitioner is to file an appeal against the final decision of the AFT under Section 30 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, OP(AFT) No.1/2019 2007 ('the Act' for short).

(2.) We heard Mr. P. Sreekumar, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Jaishankar V. Nair, Central Government Counsel at length.

(3.) The second proviso to Section 30 (1) of the Act is categoric that there shall be no appeal against an interlocutory order and that the same shall lie only against the final decision or order of the AFT. However the power of judicial review vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not curtailed or circumscribed by the provisions of the Act. The law in this regard has been summarised in Union of India and others v. Major General Shri Kant Sharma and another [(2015) 6 SCC 773] which is extracted below: