ABHIJEET JOSHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ravi Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief for Mr. Raj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Varun Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.

(2.) Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking quashing of punishment of severe reprimand awarded to petitioner vide order dtd. 24/3/2022. Relief with regard to quashing of Part II of order dtd. 6/5/2022 along with direction to opposite parties to promote petitioner from the post of Havildar to the next higher rank of Nb. Subedar along with consequential benefits has also been sought as is the additional opportunity for petitioner to appear in interview against his scheduled SSB interview on 8/6/2022.

(3.) At the very outset, learned counsel for opposite party has raised a preliminary objections regarding maintainability of the petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India before this Court. It has been submitted that the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2007) specifically applies under Sec. 2 in so far as it relates to service matters. It is submitted that Sec. 3(o) defines service matters and clause (ii) indicates promotion as one of the service matters which is cognizable by the Tribunal. It is further submitted that exceptions to matters which are beyond jurisdiction of the Tribunal are also indicated in Sec. 3(o) in which there is no exception indicated for taking cognizance of punishment of severe reprimand. It is also submitted that order of severe reprimand being ancillary to the prayer of promotion made by petitioner, therefore would be cognizable only by Tribunal and not by this Court at the first instance.