ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, …aftlko.up.nic.in/C3 Daily Order/c3-Ordersheet...

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 3

O.A. No. 63 of 2015

Lt Gyanendra Madhukar Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus

Union of India & Others Respondents

By Legal Practitioner for Respondents

Notes of the

Registry

Orders of the Tribunal

20.03.2015

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abdul Mateen, Member (J)

Hon’ble Lt. Gen. A.M. Verma, Member (A)

Memo of appearance filed by Shri Rajesh Kumar on behalf of

respondents no. 1 to 5 is taken on record. When the case is next listed, his

name be shown as counsel for the said respondents.

Present: Shri Devansh Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Shri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents, along with

Capt. Ridhishri, Departmental Representative.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant at length. After conclusion of

the argument learned counsel for the applicant states that he intends to

withdraw this O.A. and prays for liberty to file a fresh O.A.

Accordingly, this O.A. No. 63 of 2015 is dismissed as withdrawn

with liberty to the applicant to file a fresh O.A., if he so advised.

(Lt. Gen A.M. Verma) (Justice Abdul Mateen)

Member (A) Member (J)

PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

DY. No. 1559 of 2014

Keshar Bahadur Tamang Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri Yashpal Singh, learned Amicus Curiae for the

applicant, and Shri Prakhar Kankan, learned counsel for the respondents,

along with Capt. Ridhishri, Departmental Representative.

This Court on 3.2.2015 directed the office to issue notice to the

applicant at his residential address, mentioned in the aforesaid order. The

office report dated 18.3.2015 indicates that the notice sent to the applicant

has not yet received back as served or unserved.

Office is, therefore, again directed to list this case on 27.4.2015 for

admission with a fresh report about service of notice on the applicant before

the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 1533 of 2014 with M.A. No. 1534 of 2014

(Inre: M.A. No. 144 of 2014)

Smt Sushila Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri O.P. Kushwaha holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar,

learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel

for the respondents, along with Capt. Ridhishri, Departmental

Representative.

Misc. Application No. 1533 of 2014.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant. This is an application for

condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, being M.A. No.

1534 of 2014, for recall of the order dated 28.8.2014, dismissing DY No.

1109 of 2014 for non-prosecution.

We have gone through the affidavit filed along with this delay

condonation application. The reason shown in the affidavit seems to be

genuine. Accordingly, this application is allowed.


This is an application for recall of the order dated 28.8.2014, passed

by this Court, dismissing DY No. 1109 of 2014 for non-prosecution.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant on this application and

perused the affidavit filed in support of this application. The reason shown

in the affidavit for not attending the case on 28.8.2014 seems to be genuine.

Accordingly, this application is allowed and the order dated 28.8.2014 is

hereby recalled provided the applicant deposits a sum of Rs. 500/- in the

A.F.T. Bar Association within a period of one week.

Office is directed to restore DY No. 1109 of 2014 to its original

number after the cost of Rs. 500/- is deposited in the AFT Bar Association

and since the matter relates to family pension, list on 14.4.2014 for

admission before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster of

that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


(Inre: M.A. No. 1531 of 2014 & M.A. No. 1532 of 2014 & M.A. No. 463 of 2014)

Govind Singh Rautela Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri O.P.Kushwaha holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar,

learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava,

learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Ridhishri,

Departmental Representative.

M.A. No. 248 of 2015 and M.A. No. 260 of 2015 have been filed by

the applicant for condoning the delay in filing the restoration application as

well as for recall of the order dated 10.12.2014, passed by the Bench

consisting of one of us (Hon. Abdul Mateen, Member (J)) and Hon. Air

Marshal Anil Chopra, Mem ber (A). By the aforesaid order the Court had

dismissed M.A. No. 1532 of 2014 and M.A. No. 463 of 2014 for non-

prosecution.

Office is, therefore, directed to list the above two applications, i.e.

M.A. No. 248 of 2015 and M.A. No. 260 of 2015 before the appropriate

Bench for orders on 7.4.2014.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 302 of 2011

Brijendra Kumar Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri Vinay Pandey holding brief of Shri P.N. Chaturvedi,

learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri Prakhar Kankan, learned counsel

for the respondents, along with Capt. Ridhishri, Departmental

Representative.

The matter pertains to SCM proceedings initiated against the applicant,

who happened to be Sepoy in the Army and had manhandled an officer and

for which he had been proceeded with in SCM and ultimately dismissed

from service.

The argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant is that

the applicant was tried by a Commanding Officer who was not competent to

proceed with the SCM ;proceedings.

While going through the O.A. we do not find any of the ground

argued today for challenging the aforesaid punishment awarded to the

applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted two

weeks’ time to file amendment application.

List for admission on 9.4.2015 before the appropriate Court having

jurisdiction, as per roster of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


& M.A. No. 1670 of 2014

Poonam Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri Parijaat Belaura, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt.

Ridhishri, Departmental Representative.

This O.A. has been filed by the applicant with an application for

condoning the delay in filing this O.A. claiming herself to be the widow of

Nk/Driver (MT) Chauhan Rakesh Kumar, who died on 17.7.2013. Through

this O.A. the applicant has challenged the order of punishment passed as far

back as on 7.2.2005.

The respondents in their objection to the delay condonation

application indicated in paragraph 6 that there is a delay of more than 8

years in filing this O.A.

Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted one

month’s time to file rejoinder affidavit.

List for orders on 27.4.2015 before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 123 of 2010 with M.A. No. 1525 of 2014

Vivek Anand Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri Virat Anand. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents, along with



This application has been moved by the applicant seeking

amendment in the O.A. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that

since this amendment application is a bulky one he needs time to go through

it and to file objection. He, therefore, prays for and is granted four weeks’

time to file objection to the amendment application.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 52 of 2015

Sukhpal Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri V.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, and


Learned counsel for the respondents is not present.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant on admission of this case.

The case of the applicant is that the SCM proceedings took place on the

complaint made by a lady, viz. Ms. Archana Devi, claiming that the

applicant got married with her and in the SCM the applicant has been

dismissed from service on the ground that the applicant had not furnished

correct information at the time of joining the Army that he was married,

rather has falsely disclosed that he was not married.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the lady with

whom the marriage allegedly took place between her and the applicant has

disclosed, at the time of convening of the SCM proceedings, that marriage

never took place between her and the applicant and there is nothing on

record to indicate that marriage took place between Ms. Archana Devi and

the applicant.

The respondents are, therefore, directed to produce the entire

proceedings before this Court on the next date.

List for orders on 18.52015 before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 600 of 2010

Sunil Kumar Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Shri K.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, and



Learned counsel or the applicant submits that he has not yet able to

gather the information, as directed by this Court on 2.12.2014, about the

outcome of the summary disposal matter, pending before the Hon’ble

Supreme Court He, therefore, prays for and is granted further one month’s

time and to also satisfy this Court with respect to maintainability of this T.A.

in view of Section 21 of the A.F.T. Act, 2007.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 36 of 2013 with M.A. No. 899 of 2014

Man Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.03.2015



Present: Lt. Col. A.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant, and




This is an application for taking supplementary rejoinder affidavit on

record.

The supplementary rejoinder affidavit is taken on record and the

application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to file fresh amended

copies of the T.A. since lot of amendments have been incorporated in the

original T.A.

Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted a week’s

time to file amended copies of the T.A.

List this case on 10.4.2015 for admission before the appropriate

Court having jurisdiction, as per roster of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 125 of 2012

Pabitra Maity Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant, and Capt. Ridhishri, Departmental Representative.


As it comes out from the order dated 19.11.2014 that the respondents

were granted time to file copies of Annexures ‘CA-1’ to ‘CA-4’ which have

not been enclosed with the counter affidavit in the Bench Copy. Further

copy of the order setting aside SCM proceedings which has also not been

filed on behalf of the respondents, was also directed to be filed by means of

supplementary counter affidavit, but the said order has not yet been

complied with.

The Departmental Representative submits that in compliance of the

aforesaid order dated 19.11.2014, supplementary counter affidavit annexing

therewith necessary documents, are ready but since Shri D.K. Pandey,

learned Standing Counsel, has gone to the Circuit Bench at Jabalpur, the

supplementary counter affidavit could not be filed. She, therefore, prays for

and is granted a week’s time to file the supplementary counter affidavit.

Further learned counsel for the applicant is not prepared with the

brief today.

Accordingly, list this case on 27.3.2015 for admission before the

appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 279 of 2014

Col AP Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Capt. Ridhishri, Departmental Representative.

On 17.12.2014 this Court directed to list this case before the Circuit

Bench at Jabalpur on 19.3.2015. Office report dated 17.3.2015 indicates that

inadvertently this case could not be listed on 19.3.2015 before the Circuit

Bench at Jabalpur and the file also remained at Lucknow.

As per office report, learned counsel for the applicant requested to

list this case at Lucknow on 24/25.3.2015.

Accordingly, as prayed by learned counsel for the applicant, list this

case on 24.3.2015 for admission before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Virendra Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Memo of appearance filed by Shri Mukund Tewari on behalf of

respondents no. 1 to 3 is taken on record. When the case is next listed, his

name be shown as counsel for the said respondents.

Present: Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, and



On 29.10.2014 this Court directed learned counsel for the applicant to

bring on record clear and legible copies as well as typed copies of the post-

mortem report of the deceased, typed copies of the statements of the

prosecution witnesses and copies of injury report as well as its typed copies,

but the same have not yet been filed. Learned Standing Counsel is directed

to bring on record the aforesaid copies as well as their typed copies within

three weeks.

List for admission on 29.4.2015 before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Bisram Giri Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri P.N. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, and



Misc. Application No. 1255 of 2014 relates to substitution of the

legal hairs of the deceased applicant, moved by the widow of the applicant,

viz. Smt. Asha Devi stating therein that the applicant has died on 18.7.2014

leaving behind him his widow, two sons, viz. Yashawant Giri & Chandan

Kumar Giri.

The Departmental Representative placed before this Court a signal

No. A-4350 dated 26.12.2014 issued by the Adjutant, Artillery Records, to

the effect that the deceased applicant, viz. Bishram Giri, has left behind him

Smt. Asha Devi, his widow, two sons, viz. Jaswant Giri & Chandan Giri,

and one daughter, viz. Raju Giri. However, the name of the daughter of

deceased applicant, viz. Raju Giri, has not been mentioned in the

substitution application as also the legal heir of the deceased applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant states that since Raju Giri is

married, as such her name has not been mentioned in the substitution

application.

We are of the view that inspite of Raju Giri having been married, she

should also be impleaded as heir and legal representative of the deceased

applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, prays for and is granted

ten days’ time to move necessary application for impleading Raju Giri also

as heir and legal representative of the deceased applicant.

The aforesaid signal message, sent to the AFT Cell, HQ Lucknow

Sub Area, produced before this Court by the Departmental Representative, is

taken on record.

List this M.A. No. 1255 of 2014 again for orders on 6.4.2015 before

the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Jeetendra Bahadur Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri R. Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, and



Office report dated 21.1.2015 indicates that the notice issued to

respondent no. 5 has been served on him. Therefore, service upon

respondent no. 5 deemed to be sufficient.

As prayed by learned counsel for the applicant, list this case on

25.3.2015 for admission before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as

per roster of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Lt Col Mukesh Baboo Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents,


On call of the case in the revised list, no one appears for the

applicant, neither there is any request to adjourn/pass over the case.

Accordingly, M.A. No. 360 of 2015 as well as O.A. No. 12 of 2015 are

dismissed for non-prosecution.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Ram Naresh Ram Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents,


On call of the case Shri V.K. Pandey, Advocate, appeared and stated

that Shri P.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, has not come to this

Court today. He, therefore, prays for adjournment.

Since this matter relates to the year 2010, therefore, as a matter of last

opportunity this case is being adjourned today.

List on 24.3.2015 for orders before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 84 of 2012

Narendra Kumar Rana Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri P.N. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, and



On call of the case learned counsel for the applicant states that he has

not been able to comply the order of this Court dated 10.10.2014. He,

therefore, prays for and is granted 10 days’ time to comply the aforesaid

order.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 107 of 2012

Sukhbir Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.03.2015



Present: Shri R. Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri

Prakhar Kankan, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt.


Office report dated 3.2.2015 indicates that the cost of Rs. 5,000/-,

imposed upon the respondents, has been deposited.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted a

week’s time to file supplementary counter affidavit.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

EX.-A. No. 48 of 2014

(Inre: O.A. No. 232 of 2012)

Diwan Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015



Present: Capt. Ridhishri Sharma, Departmental Representative.

Neither learned counsel for the applicant nor learned counsel for the

respondents is present.

It has been informed by the Bench Secretary that the Advocates are

abstaining themselves from judicial work on a call given by the A.F.T. Bar

Association. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.

Today even, inspite of sufficient time granted, the Departmental

Representative failed to satisfy this Court as to whether the payment towards

pensionery benefits has been made to the applicant or not in compliance of

the judgment and order dated 17.7.2014, passed by this Court in O.A. No.

232 of 2012. As prayed by her, one week’s further time is granted to the

respondents to file an affidavit mentioning therein whether the payment with

respect of necessary pensionery benefits has been made to the applicant or

not.

List this case again on 26.3.2015 for orders before the appropriate




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 496 of 2015

(Inre: T.A. No. 1352 of 2010)

Ashok Kumar Shukla Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015









List this case again on 16.4.2015 for admission before the




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 161 of 2012

Amit Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015











.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 125 of 2010

Joginder Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 573 of 2010

Satyendra Prasad Applicant


Versus

Chief of Army Staff & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 595 of 2010

Vijay Keshav Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 1210 of 2010 with M.A. No. 1334 of 2014 & M.A. No. 422 of 2015

Gajraj Singh Tomar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 400 of 2014 with M.A. No. 1344 & M.A. No. 1339 of 2014

(Inre: O.A. No. 334 of 2011)

RD Sharma Applicant


Versus

Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015



Present: Shri Avadesh Kumar Pal holding brief of Shri T.N. Tiwari,

learned counsel for the applicant, and Sgt. S.K. Pandey, Departmental

Representative.




Association.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in compliance of the

judgment and order dated 5.12.2013, passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No.

334 of 2011, has not yet been fully complied with in toto by the respondents.

He further submits that the payment towards leave encashment of 175 days

is yet to be paid to the applicant by the respondents.

Sgt. S.K. Pandey, Departmental Representative, prays for and is

granted two weeks’ further time and no more to comply with the aforesaid

judgment and order dated 5.12.2013 in toto, i.e. to ensure that the payment

towards leave encashment is made to the applicant by the next date, failing

which, it is clarified that, strict view will be taken against the concerned

respondents.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Lt Col Harshwardhan Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015








Association. However, one person claiming himself to be Lt. Col.

Harshwardhan Singh, the applicant, is present.

We have gone through the order-sheets. As per office report dated

16.3.2015 the notice issued to respondent no. 4 has not yet received back as

served or unserved. On the other hand the Departmental Representative,

Capt. Ridhishri Sharma, submits that Shri Mukund Tewari has filed his

power on behalf of respondent no. 4, meaning thereby that notice to

respondent no. 4 has be served on him and, therefore, the service on

respondent no. 4 is complete.

So far as respondent no. 5 is concerned, notice has not yet been

issued to him. Let notice be issued to respondent no. 5 within ten days

mentioning therein about the next date fixed in this case. The applicant, who

is present in person, is granted one week’s time to take necessary steps

towards service on respondent no. 5.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3


Ugra Sen Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 1258 of 2010

Hari Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015



Dismissed.

For judgment and order, see our judgment and order of date passed

on separate sheets.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

EX-A. No. 11 of 2015

(Inre: O.A. No. 148 of 2013)

Jatinder Kumar Pandey Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015









This Execution Application has been moved by the applicant

aggrieved against non-implementation of our judgment and order dated

13.2.2015, passed in O.A. No. 148 of 2013.

The Departmental Representative, who is present in Court, seeks two

months’ further time to obtain instruction as to whether the aforesaid

judgment and order has been implemented or not.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 389 of 2015

(Inre: M.A. No. 915 of 2014)

Abhimanyu Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 244 of 2010

Sinhasan Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 220 of 2011

Shyam Kishore Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 72 of 2013

Kalu Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 65 of 2012

Ganga Ram Chaubey Applicant


Versus

CO, 107 AD Regt & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

EX.A. No. 9 of 2012

(Inre : O.A. No. 295 of 2011)

Birendra Singh Tomar Applicant


Versus

SK Sharma Secretary, MoD Respondent

By Legal Practitioner for Respondent

Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015









On earlier occasions this Court had directed the learned counsel or

the parties to inform about the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 2806 of 2013,

pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, but till date there is nothing on

record to indicate the outcome of the aforesaid Civil Appeal. Accordingly,

two months’ further time is granted to learned counsel for the parties to

make good the query made on earlier occasions.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A.(A). No. 251 of 2014

Vipin Pratap Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 30 of 2011

Ram Kishore Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 603 of 2010 with M.A. 433 of 2015

Rajendra Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015










This is an application, filed by the applicant, for taking

Supplementary Affidavit on record. The Supplementary Affidavit is taken

on record. The application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Since this matter relates to the year 2010, the office is directed to list

this case again on 6.4.2015 for hearing before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 947 of 2010

Vinod Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.03.2015









Since this matter relates to the year 2010, the office is directed to list

this case again on 20.4.2015 for hearing before the appropriate Court having




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 381 of 2014 with M.A. No. 1053 of 2013 & M.A. 489 of 2015

(Inre: M.A. No. 838 of 2013 & T.A. No. 1005 of 2010)

Birsan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the Orders of the Tribunal

Registry

16.03.2015




Neither learned counsel for the applicant nor learned counsel

for the respondents is present.

The applicant, Birsan, appeared in person and stated that his

counsel has not come to this Court today. He, therefore, prays for

adjournment. It has further been informed by the Bench Secretary that

the Advocates are abstaining themselves from judicial work on a call

given by the U.P. Bar Council. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for

the day.

This is a review application, filed by the applicant.

On 28.1.2015 the respondents were granted time to file

objection on the delay condonation application, but no objection has

yet been filed. Capt. Ridhishri Sharma, Departmental Representative,

prays for and is granted further six weeks and no more time to file

objection.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 144 of 2015

Yogendra Kumar Sharma Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015







abstaining themselves from judicial work on a call given by the U.P. Bar

Council. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.

On 2.2.2015 the respondents were granted time to file objection on

the delay condonation application, but no objection has yet been filed. Capt.

Ridhishri Shrama, Departmental Representative, prays for and is granted

further six weeks’ time to file objection.

List this case again on 7.5.2015 for admission before the appropriate




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 145 of 2015

Srikant Chaubey Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015









On 2.2.2015 the respondents were granted time to file objection on

the delay condonation application, but no objection has yet been filed. Capt.

Ridhishri Shrama, Departmental Representative, prays for and is granted

further six weeks’ time to file objection.

List this case again on 8.5.2015 for admission before the appropriate




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 491 of 2015

(Inre: O.A. No. 165 of 2013)

Parikramajit Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 492 of 2015

(Inre: M.A. No. 1064 of 2013)

Nil Kant Gain Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 61 of 2014

Sukhvir Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015









On going through the record we find that the matter pertains to

family pension.

Accordingly, the office is directed to list this case again on 27.3.2015

for admission before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster

of that date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 542 of 2010

Bhagwat Prasad Mishra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 1455 of 2010

Sarvjit Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 82 of 2012

Mahavir Singh Rawat Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 427 of 2012

Sajan Mishra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015













PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 128 of 2010

Mohitosh Mandal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015









The respondents have not yet complied with our order dated

17.12.2014. As prayed by Capt. Ridhishri Sharma, Departmental

Representative, three weeks and no more time is granted to the respondents

to comply our aforesaid order dated 17.12.2014 by the next date.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 01 of 2011

Praveen Kumar Pal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015









List this case again on 27.5.2015 for hearing before the appropriate




PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 107 of 2011

Lekh Raj Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.03.2015






A person claiming himself to be Lekh Raj Singh, the applicant, is

present in Court. He stated that his counsel has not come to this Court today.

He, therefore, prays for adjournment. It has further been informed by the

Bench Secretary that the Advocates are abstaining themselves from judicial

work on a call given by the U.P. Bar Council. Accordingly, the case is

adjourned for the day.

Further while going through the order-sheets we find that this case

has not yet been admitted, though it has been listed by the office for hearing.

The office is, therefore, directed to list this case again on 13.7.2015

for admission before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster

of that date.



PG.

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, …aftlko.up.nic.in/C3 Daily Order/c3-Ordersheet...

Documents

Transcript of ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, …aftlko.up.nic.in/C3 Daily Order/c3-Ordersheet...