NASEER NAIK Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order made in SWP No. 2727/2001 dated 08.04.2002 wherein the appellant challenged the order of dismissal dated 07.02.1999 which was passed under Sec. 39(a) of the Army Act, 1950 for absenting himself without leave for a period of 145 days. The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge alleged and, therefore, the order of dismissal was declared as valid. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows: - -

(2.) The contention raised in this appeal is that the disciplinary authority while passing the order has not considered the gravity of the delinquency and has not stated any reasons in the order of dismissal, therefore, the punishment imposed without considering the gravity of offence and the order passed without reasons cannot be upheld as various punishments are provided under Sec. 39(a) of the Army Act, which includes warning withholding of increments, reversion and dismissal, and no reason is stated for imposing the extreme penalty of dismissal by the disciplinary authority.

(3.) Lt. Col Alok Shukla, OIC Legal Cell appearing for the respondents defended the action of the military by stating that Rule 39(a) of the Army Act nowhere requires stating of reasons for imposing the penalty and in the absence of any statutory obligation to state the reasons for awarding the punishment, the order of dismissal is not vitiated. He has also relied on a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported in : AIR 1990 SC 1984 (S.N. Mukherjee v/s. Union of India) and prayed for dismissing the appeal.